Computerized Prescriber Order Entry Implementation in a Physician Assistant–Managed Hematology and Oncology Inpatient Service: Effects on Workflow and Task Switching
Open accessAbstract
Purpose Little is known about the impact of computerized prescriber order entry (CPOE) systems on inpatient hematology/oncology services. The objective of this study was to quantify the impact of an inpatient CPOE implementation on workflow, with an emphasis on ordering and direct patient care time. Methods We conducted a direct-observation time-and-motion study of the provider team of a hematology/oncology inpatient service both before and after CPOE implementation, characterizing workflow into 60 distinct activity categories. The provider team comprised physician assistants supervised by attending physicians. Results were adjusted to account for variations in the census. We also conducted an analysis of computer logs to assess CPOE system usage. Results Study participants were observed for 228.0 hours over 53 observation sessions. There was little change in the proportion of census-adjusted time spent on ordering (10.2% before v 11.4% after) and on direct patient care (50.7% before v 47.8% after). Workflow fragmentation decreased, with providers spending an average of 131.2 seconds on a continuous task before implementation and 218.3 seconds after (P Conclusion CPOE implementation did not negatively affect time available for direct patient care. Workflow fragmentation decreased, which is likely beneficial.
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?
Methods for evaluating CDS impact on EHR activities remain limited, and existing approaches are hard to scale up for large implementation programs.
“Methods for evaluating CDS impact on EHR activities remain limited, and existing approaches (eg, direct observation, qualitative interview, and survey) are hard to scale up for large implementation programs.”
From Electronic health record activity changes around new decision support implementation: monitoring using audit logs and topic modeling (2025) · cites this paper as [67]
Cites
Overhage, J. M., Perkins, S., Tierney, W. M., & McDonald, C. J. (2001) · Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association · doi:10.1136/jamia.2001.0080361 · Cited by 232 · see citing works
Computerized Physician Order Entry: Helpful or Harmful?
Berger, R. G. (2003) · Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association · doi:10.1197/jamia.m1411 · Cited by 223 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Interaction time with electronic health records: a systematic review
Pinevich, Y., Clark, K. J., Harrison, A. M., Pickering, B. W., & Herasevich, V. (2021) · Applied Clinical Informatics · doi:10.1055/s-0041-1733909 · Cited by 62 · see citing works
Chen, J., Cutrona, S. L., Dharod, A., Moses, A., Bridges, A., Ostasiewski, B., Foley, K. L., Houston, T. K., iDAPT (Implementation & Informatics Developing Adaptable Processes and Technologies for Cancer Control) Implementation Science Center for Cancer Control, Chen, J., et al. (2025) · JAMIA Open · doi:10.1093/jamiaopen/ooaf050 · Cited by 3 · see citing works
- Authors
- Hanauer, D. A., Zheng, K., Commiskey, E. L., Duck, M. G., Choi, S. W., & Blayney, D. W.
- Affiliations
- University of Michigan (US)
- Venue
- Journal of Oncology Practice
- Published
- 2013-07
- Volume
- 9
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- e103-e114
- ISSN
- 1554-7477 (ISSN-L)
- 1935-469X
- PMC
- PMC3710176
- OpenAlex
- W2107787847
- Cited by
- 17
- References
- 2
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 3 · 2017: 1 · 2015: 3
- FWCI
- 1.73
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- europepmc.org
- Locations
- Journal of Oncology Practice (publishedVersion)
- Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- National Institutes of Health
- National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (K23AI091623)
- National Center for Research Resources (UL1RR024986)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › Health Information Management › Electronic Health Records Systems
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Emergency Medicine › Hospital Admissions and Outcomes
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Clinical Laboratory Practices and Quality Control
- Keywords
- computerized physician order entry, CPOE implementation, physician assistants, clinical workflow, task switching, time and motion study
- MeSH terms
- Patient Care, Hematology, Humans, Inpatients, Medical Oncology, Physician Assistants, Task Performance and Analysis, Time Factors, Medical Order Entry Systems, Workflow
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