Safety Issues Related to the Electronic Medical Record (EMR): Synthesis of the Literature from the Last Decade, 2000-2009
Abstract
Healthcare is a complex industry burdened by numerous and complicated clinical and administrative transactions that require many behavioral changes by patients, clinicians, and provider organizations. While healthcare information technology (HIT) is intended to relieve some of the burden by reducing errors, several aspects of systems such as the electronic medical record (EMR) may actually increase the incidence of certain types of errors or produce new safety risks that result in harm. Healthcare leaders must appreciate the complexity surrounding EMRs and understand the safety issues in order to mandate sound EMR design, development, implementation, and use. This article seeks to inform executives, clinicians, and technology professionals what has been learned through published research on the safety of HIT systems during the last decade, focusing on computerized physician order entry (CPOE), clinical decision support systems (CDSS), and bar-coded medication administration (BCMA).
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
Rapid adoption of electronic health records has revealed potential safety concerns related to EHR design, implementation, and use.
“In particular, rapid adoption of electronic health records (EHRs) has revealed potential safety concerns related to EHR design, implementation, and use.12 17–21”
From An analysis of electronic health record-related patient safety concerns (2014) · cites this paper as [20]
Increasing adoption of electronic health records has revealed potential safety implications related to EHR design, implementation, and use.
“the increasing adoption of electronic health records (EHR) has revealed potential safety implications related to EHR design, implementation, and use.”
From Exploring the sociotechnical intersection of patient safety and electronic health record implementation (2014) · cites this paper as [15]
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 41 · Cited by 93
- Authors
- Harrington, L., Kennerly, D., & Johnson, C.
- Affiliations
- Duke University (US)
- ORCID
- Johnson, Constance
- Venue
- Journal of Healthcare Management
- Published
- 2011-01
- Volume
- 56
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 31-44
- ISSN
- 1096-9012 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2185052693
- Semantic Scholar
- 0d7bb2a52a1a403d28eade3f5e6dd9ed0ff6d20c
- Cited by
- 93
- References
- 41
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 14 · 2015: 17 · 2014: 6 · 2013: 6 · 2012: 7
- FWCI
- 11.26
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Journal of Healthcare 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, health information technology, patient safety, computerized physician order entry, clinical decision support systems, medical errors
- MeSH terms
- Review Literature as Topic, United States, Safety Management, Electronic Health Records
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