Secure Messaging Use and Wrong-Patient Errors

Hojjat Salmasian

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2024.47782

2024-12-06

JAMA Network Open

Abstract:In less than 2 decades, electronic health records (EHRs) have moved from a niche tool used by only a minority of hospitals and health care professionals to an inevitable norm; by 2021, nearly all hospitals and 80% of office-based physicians in the US had adopted an EHR system. 1 A major driver for this trend has been the promise of improving health care quality and safety by reducing medical errors. Much evidence supports this promise, as well as refutes it. Furthermore, the lived experiences of EHR users have been decidedly mixed. 2 EHR systems are complex, and so are the outcomes associated with their use. To be sure, EHRs have had some unintended consequences on health care. 3 Paper charts offered a variety of visual and tactile cues that may have subtly helped clinicians avoid safety threats, such as a wrong-patient error, but in the EHR, each chart is just a row in a patient list or a tab in the EHR window. 4 EHRs have also overhauled how communication happens in health care. Telephone calls and pagers have given way to secure chat messages electronically delivered to the clinician's mobile device. These innovations are not only complex but also carry unintended consequences yet to be discovered and studied. In this issue of JAMA Network Open , Lou et al 5 present their findings of an association between secure messaging use and wrong-patient order entry errors among clinicians in the inpatient setting. They used a previously established measure for estimating wrong-patient order entry errors, called the wrong-patient retract-and-reorder (RAR) method. 6 Although the RAR method has been used in several studies focused on measuring or reducing wrong-patient errors, it has a known limitation: It only measures self-intercepted wrong-patient order entry errors. Therefore, all other forms of wrong-patient errors (eg, those intercepted by another clinician, those that are not intercepted and reach the patient, or those that do not involve order entry) are not captured by RAR. The causal pathway for those errors may be similar to self-intercepted wrong-patient order entry errors, but from the standpoint of scientific rigor, findings from RAR event data should be generalized with caution to other forms of wrong-patient errors. Lou et al 5 used data from the EHR about the use of secure messaging to define the exposure variable. They studied the association between this exposure variable with the outcome variable of RAR event rate, and they accounted for some observable potential confounders to adjust their analyses. All the data used in their study came from the EHR audit logs; ie, the authors neither collected data directly from the users nor used data from other sources (eg, the safety reporting system) to corroborate or augment their analyses. What they found was that clinicians who used secure messaging more than their peers also had a modestly higher rate of RAR events than their peers. The study by Lou et al 5 is observational in nature and cannot establish causality, but they report a notable association nonetheless. This association remained consistent when they adjusted it for a few possible confounders, such as the clinician's role and age, or proxy variables representing the clinician's patient load. Notably, the association was stronger among attending physicians (who send and receive fewer secure messages in general) than among resident physicians (who use secure messaging more frequently). This finding does not seem to be associated with age. While attending physicians tend to be older than resident physicians and while the younger generation may be more tech savvy, the authors did not find age to be a significant confounder. It is plausible that clinicians who use secure messaging sporadically may be more susceptible to its associated distractions. Previous research on wrong-patient errors has indicated that distraction may be the predominant reason users cite for placing an order for the wrong patient. 6 Findings from a randomized study indicated that wrong-patient errors happen much more frequently in the emergency and inpatient settings, where distractions are more abundant compared with the outpatient setting. 7 These findings corroborate with the observations Lou et al 5 report about the association between secure messaging use and wrong-patient errors. However, there are important alternative explanations for the associations observed in this study. For instance, it is possible that the higher volume of secure messaging among clinicians with higher wrong-patient RAR rates may be partly due to other clinicians messaging them about having made a wrong-patient error. It is also plausible that wrong-patient errors may occur more frequently in complex care settings or for complex patients, and secure messaging may be more frequent in -Abstract Truncated-

medicine, general & internal