The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Impact of an Electronic Health Record on Follow-up Time for Markedly Elevated Serum Potassium Results
Abstract
Follow-up of abnormal ambulatory laboratory results is often suboptimal. The impact of an ambulatory electronic health record (EHR) on follow-up of markedly elevated blood potassium (K( +)) results was investigated via a retrospective medical record review-before and after EHR implementation-of patients at an adult primary care practice who had a nonhemolyzed K(+) ≥ 6.0 mEq/L. In all, 188 patients in the pre-EHR group and 30 in the EHR group satisfied inclusion criteria. The mean K(+) for the 2 groups was 6.3 mEq/L. The EHR group had 4.5 times the odds (95% confidence interval = 1.3-15.8) of having their episodes of hyperkalemia followed up within 4 days. Patients in the EHR group were also more likely to have their blood K(+) rechecked within 4 days (63.3% vs 43.6%; P = .044). An ambulatory EHR with a results management system improves documentation and time to follow-up for patients with markedly abnormal lab results.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
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?
A sample size of 30 participants, each reviewing 35 test results, was required to achieve 80% power to detect a statistically significant difference in cognitive workload and performance.
“On the basis of the anticipated rate of appropriately identified abnormal test results in the literature12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20,21 and the anticipated magnitude of the association of the enhanced EHR, we required a sample size of 30 participants, each reviewing 35 test results, to achieve 80% power to detect a statistically significant difference in cognitive workload and performance.”
From Association of the Usability of Electronic Health Records With Cognitive Workload and Performance Levels Among Physicians (2019) · cites this paper as [15]
Even in the EHR environment, with alerts and reminders in place, physicians continue to often inappropriately manage abnormal test results.
“Even in the EHR environment, with alerts and reminders in place, physicians continue to often inappropriately manage abnormal test results.12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20,21”
From Association of the Usability of Electronic Health Records With Cognitive Workload and Performance Levels Among Physicians (2019) · cites this paper as [15]
Citations
Cites
Overriding of Drug Safety Alerts in Computerized Physician Order Entry
van der Sijs, H., Aarts, J., Vulto, A., & Berg, M. (2006) · Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association · doi:10.1197/jamia.m1809 · Cited by 1,117
Kuperman, G. J., Teich, J. M., Tanasijevic, M. J., Ma'Luf, N., Rittenberg, E., Jha, A., Fiskio, J., Winkelman, J., & Bates, D. W. (1999) · Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association · doi:10.1136/jamia.1999.0060512 · Cited by 252
Reardon, L. C., & Macpherson, D. S. (1998) · Archives of Internal Medicine · doi:10.1001/archinte.158.1.26 · Cited by 222
Singh, H., Thomas, E. J., Mani, S., Sittig, D., Arora, H., Espadas, D., Khan, M. M., & Petersen, L. A. (2009) · Archives of Internal Medicine · doi:10.1001/archinternmed.2009.263 · Cited by 212
Singh, H., Naik, A. D., Rao, R., & Petersen, L. A. (2008) · Journal of General Internal Medicine · doi:10.1007/s11606-007-0393-z · Cited by 162 · cited 1×
“The use of electronic health records (EHRs) with test results management functionality is a systems-based approach to improve test result follow-up and reduce adverse events.(8-10) Some studies have shown that these systems may improve follow-up of laboratory results,(9,11) screening practices,(12) and medication safe…”
Method
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 30
- 10.1136/qshc.2006.021915 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1111/j.1525-1497.2004.30386.x · DOI
- Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality., Patient fact sheet: 20 tips to help prevent medical error
- 10.1177/1062860605285049 · DOI
- 10.1001/archinte.164.20.2223 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1097/PTS.0b013e31818d1ca4 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1016/S1386-5056(03)00133-3 · DOI
- 10.1197/jamia.M2608 · DOI
- Petersen LA, 1998, Jt Comm J Qual Improv, 24, 77
- 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.107.697201 · DOI
- 10.1111/j.1532-5415.2007.01202.x · DOI
- 10.2214/AJR.04.1913 · DOI
- 10.1016/S1553-7250(07)33052-3 · DOI
- 10.1186/1471-2296-8-32 · DOI
- Kuperman GJ, 1996, Proc AMIA Annu Fall Symp., 704
- 10.1002/pds.1800 · DOI · Paper page
- Taylor LK, 2004, Stud Health Technol Inform, 107, 1101
- 10.1001/archinte.158.8.917 · DOI
- 10.7326/0003-4819-124-2-199601150-00002 · DOI
- 10.1001/archinte.161.8.1089 · DOI
- 10.1097/00003246-199906000-00029 · DOI
- 10.1016/S0002-9343(01)00642-8 · DOI
- 10.1046/j.1525-1497.1997.07128.x · DOI
- 10.1056/NEJMoa040135 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1111/j.1527-5299.2000.80157.x · DOI
- 10.1177/1062860605285047 · DOI
- 10.1177/1062860607305245 · DOI
- 10.1017/CBO9781139062367 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1177/107755879705400404 · DOI
- 10.1111/j.1525-1497.2004.30357.x · DOI · Paper page
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Mazur, L. M., Mosaly, P. R., Moore, C., & Marks, L. (2019) · JAMA Network Open · doi:10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2019.1709 · Cited by 127
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Lin, J. J., & Moore, C.
- Affiliations
- Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai (US)
- University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (US)
- Venue
- American Journal of Medical Quality
- Published
- 2011-01-06
- Volume
- 26
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 308-314
- ISSN
- 1062-8606 (ISSN-L)
- 1555-824X
- OpenAlex
- W2064197403
- Cited by
- 12
- References
- 5
- Citations by year
- 2020: 1 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 1 · 2014: 1 · 2012: 2
- FWCI
- 1.54
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- American Journal of Medical Quality (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › Health Information Management › Electronic Health Records Systems
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › Medical Laboratory Technology › Clinical Laboratory Practices and Quality Control
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Nephrology › Potassium and Related Disorders
- Keywords
- electronic health records, hyperkalemia, serum potassium, follow-up duration, laboratory abnormalities, primary care, outpatient care
- MeSH terms
- Aged, Ambulatory Care Facilities, Continuity of Patient Care, Diffusion of Innovation, Female, Humans, Hyperkalemia, Male, Medical Audit, Middle Aged, Retrospective Studies, Medical Errors, 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
