Cited by 29Electronic Health Records SystemsPatient Safety and Medication ErrorsMedical Coding and Health Information

Electronic health record–related safety concerns: A cross‐sectional survey

Menon, Shailaja, Singh, Hardeep, Meyer, Ashley N. D., Belmont, Elisabeth, Sittig, Dean F.·2014·Journal of Healthcare Risk Management

Abstract

Federal electronic health record (EHR)-related initiatives are leading to rapid increases in their adoption. Despite their benefits, EHRs also introduce new risks that can lead to serious safety events. We conducted a Web-based survey of the American Society for Healthcare Risk Management and the American Health Lawyers Association to elicit perceptions regarding the frequency and types of EHR-related serious safety events. We received 369 responses. The majority (66%) worked for large hospitals and health systems with varying degrees of EHR adoption. More than half (53%) of respondents reported at least one EHR-related serious safety event in the previous 5 years, and 10% reported more than 20 events. EHR workflow (63%), user familiarity with the EHR system (63%), and integration with existing systems (59%) were most frequently endorsed as variables associated with EHR-related serious safety events. Because EHR-related safety concerns are underreported, organizations should consider implementing robust measures of EHR safety within their institution as a key step for mitigating these concerns.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/jhrm.21146

Cites

23 of 23 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Existing literature on the benefits of electronic records is largely U.S. or primary care based and reports potential rather than actual benefits, with a large proportion of this evidence reporting the potential for electronic records to improve patient safety.

    “Existing literature on the benefits of electronic records is largely U.S or primary care based [18–34] and reports ‘potential’ rather than actual benefits; with a large proportion of this evidence reporting the potential for electronic records to improve patient safety [19, 21, 23, 27–30].”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Menon, S., Singh, H., Meyer, A. N. D., Belmont, E., & Sittig, D. F.
Affiliations
  • Houston VA Center for Innovations in Quality, Effectiveness and Safety
  • MaineHealth (US)
  • Research interests center on the Design, development, implementation, and evaluation of all aspects of clinical information systems
Venue
Journal of Healthcare Risk Management
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2014-07
Volume
34
Issue
1
Pages
14-26
ISSN
  • 1074-4797 (ISSN-L)
  • 2040-0861
OpenAlex
W2099701690
Cited by
29
References
23
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 2 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 2
FWCI
9.73
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Healthcare Risk Management (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Health Information Management › Electronic Health Records Systems
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Emergency Medical Services › Patient Safety and Medication Errors
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Health Information Management › Medical Coding and Health Information
Keywords
electronic health records, patient safety, EHR adoption, healthcare risk management
MeSH terms
Cross-Sectional Studies, Humans, Surveys and Questionnaires, Risk Management, United States, Medical Errors, Workflow, Electronic Health Records, Patient Safety

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review