A survey of 250 clinicians revealed that inadequate integration between Clinical Decision Support (CDS) solutions and Electronic Health Records (EHR) significantly hampers patient care. An alarming 94 percent expressed concerns, citing delays in treatment initiation, extended hospital stays, and incorrect treatment plans. While clinicians recognized the value of external CDS solutions, 82 percent found integrating them into EHRs challenging, leading to missed opportunities. Moreover, the complexity of managing multiple external solutions contributes to clinician burnout. The study underscores the urgency of addressing integration issues as the healthcare landscape embraces AI.
In a recent survey involving 250 clinicians, a striking 94 percent expressed their concern regarding the negative impact of inadequate integration between Clinical Decision Support (CDS) solutions and Electronic Health Records (EHR) workflows on patient care.
The survey, conducted by Wakefield Research on behalf of health IT vendor Insiteflow, shed light on the critical importance of seamless integration between EHR systems and CDS solutions for healthcare providers. While clinicians acknowledged the utility of third-party CDS solutions, they emphasized that effective integration into EHR workflows is pivotal to applying these insights for better patient care outcomes.
Among the key findings from the survey:
1. Accessibility Matters: When patient-specific insights from CDS solutions are not readily accessible within EHR systems, it leads to adverse consequences:
– 53 percent of clinicians reported delayed initiation of treatment for patients.
– 52 percent observed prolonged hospital stays for patients.
– 47 percent witnessed patients receiving incorrect treatment plans.
2. Value in External Solutions: Clinicians acknowledge the value of external CDS solutions. 74 percent of respondents reported modifying initial diagnoses or treatment plans based on insights from external sources, independent of their EHR platforms.
3. Integration Challenges: However, 82 percent of respondents found it challenging to harness external CDS opportunities within their EHR systems effectively. Many clinicians had to resort to disparate methods, such as leaving their EHR and logging into separate sites, to access external insights. This disjointed approach resulted in 98 percent of providers missing opportunities to enhance patient care, save lives, and ensure timely reimbursement.
4. Burnout and Fatigue: A concerning 94 percent of clinicians noted that grappling with the complexities of accessing and utilizing patient-specific insights from various external solutions contributed to feelings of fatigue and burnout.
5. Barriers to Adoption: Clinicians typically had between six and 20 or more external CDS solutions at their disposal. However, they often failed to leverage these insights due to various obstacles, including time-consuming access (43 percent), lack of intuitiveness (39 percent), complexity (27 percent), and forgetfulness (31 percent).
6. Overlooking Third-Party Solutions: The survey discovered that 80 percent of clinicians occasionally overlooked the availability of third-party CDS solutions, with nearly 50 percent admitting to frequently or consistently overlooking them.
The report highlights that each additional CDS solution further compounds workflow challenges for clinicians. As the healthcare landscape embraces artificial intelligence (AI), the authors anticipate a significant proliferation of third-party decision-support solutions. This could further complicate EHR workflows, making it even more crucial to address integration issues for healthcare providers striving to access patient-specific insights efficiently.
