This article is the eighth in a series detailing the journey to implement an EMR at UT Southwestern Medical Center University Hospitals in Dallas.
We continue to make progress towards our implementation of an electronic medical record at UT Southwestern University Hospitals.
This past month, our anesthesiologists began using the electronic medical record to complete their pre-operative assessments. When combined with the OR nurses that have already been completing their pre-op, inter-op and post-op documentation online since 2005, our surgical environment has made tremendous strides in improving patient safety. Specifically, the EMR has allowed our clinicians to better assess previous surgical history, reconcile active medications that have been documented in our clinics, and coordinate the operative experience from pre-op through recovery.
This success could not have been achieved without the hard work and diligence of our clinicians and information technology professionals. Specifically, Thomas Lacour, M.D., our medical director for anesthesiology and Tsedey Melaku, our lead nurse informaticist for our EMR implementation, provided us the necessary clinical expertise and operational guidance to make this project a success. Within the IT department, Josh Youngblood and Donna Fitzgerald led the hard work of system build and testing for this project.
Our work is far from over and multiple initiatives are entering different phases of development. Our pharmacy implementation is nearing completion of the design phase, and moving fully into the build and test phase. Our ED implementation is also near completion of the design phase. Our unit clerk order entry implementation is just beginning the design phase.
As we have so many projects moving through the design phase, I thought I would highlight some of the lessons learned from our design work for this EMR.
Don't let the vendor drive the design session
All too often, organizations treat the EMR design process as a field trip. The vendor sends the hospital a list of people that will board the bus. The vendor will provide each of the attendees a schedule and list of activities. The vendor will also list what items each person will need to bring on the field trip. The vendor will then lead the people on the bus through the list of activities. At the end of trip, the bus driver will have the necessary information to build the EMR and the attendees will definitely have been taken for a ride.
One cannot really blame the vendors for taking this simplistic approach. In a perfect world, the vendors would have a magic wand that stops time. After they stop time, they would bring together an inter-disciplinary group of clinicians who could work continuously for weeks to design the EMR. In most organizations, this magic wand doesn't exist, so vendors must settle for the field trip approach.
Clinicians should provide the documentation of current state
The most important contribution from clinical operations can be to help the organization determine what operational processes are going to be affected as a result of the implementation of the EMR. Often, this is best led by a nurse informaticist who can both understand the capabilities of the new technologies and the demands of current clinical operations. The use of clinicians to document current processes is far superior to having technical staff perform this activity. The IT staff may have more time, but the clinical staff has the necessary depth and detail. Superior documentation and understanding of current operations can save the design team months in the end.
Large groups do not design EMRs
More than a few implementations have been derailed by design groups that have made decisions that weren't accepted by senior management or by line staff clinicians. For that reason, many organizations attempt to design an EMR by committee, including staff from all departments and at all levels. The rationale is that the more people that participated in the decision, the greater the acceptance.
We have found this not to be the case. Most importantly, larger groups are harder to keep focused and to achieve consensus. More often than not, these groups either stay at too high a level to make real decisions, or get bogged down in minute detail. We have found that forming a much smaller design group, with key clinically and operationally credible staff, is the best approach. These groups, with six to eight members at the maximum, are large enough to present diverse viewpoints and small enough to achieve a shared understanding of the issues. The outcome of the design group can then be presented to larger groups or senior level management by design group members.
Develop guiding principles
It is important to develop a set of guiding principles that will help drive the overall design and implementation of your EMR. Guiding principles help determine the key principles that must always be followed in order to achieve overall system goals. Examples would include: all results must be available within the same results- viewing capability, all orders must be built with standardized nomenclature, all physician user interfaces must follow the same style palette, all core measures will be tracked electronically, etc.