Use of a Computerized Forcing Function Improves Performance in Ordering Restraints
Study objective
We evaluate the effect of a computerized order entry system forcing function on improving timely renewal of restraint orders.
Methods
In this prospective study of 2 successive interventions, physicians received computerized reminders to renew or discontinue restraint orders before their expiration. The initial intervention allowed acknowledgement of this reminder without further consequence, changing at 6 months to deny computer access until addressed. We performed chart review on emergency department visits with restraint orders in 3 consecutive 6-month periods (A, B, C) separated by these 2 interventions, determining time to order renewal, number of restraint orders, renewal orders per hour in restraints, and time in restraints and evaluating variability in these values across study intervals. Statistical analysis for our primary outcome used the Mann-Whitney and variance ratio tests.
Results
Median time to order renewal decreased in periods B and C versus A by 64 and 56 minutes, respectively, with variability in this measure decreasing across all periods. Mean number of restraint orders in periods B and C significantly increased versus those in A (1.46 to 1.89 to 2.34), with corresponding increases in variability. Mean renewal orders per hour in restraint significantly increased in period C versus A and B, from 0.08 to 0.23 to 0.89, with increasing variability across all periods. Decreases in median time spent in restraints observed in periods B and C versus A of 45 and 105 minutes, respectively, trended toward but did not achieve significance, with significantly decreasing variability compared with baseline.
Conclusion
The forcing function improved restraint reordering and variability in practice and may have contributed to nonsignificant reductions observed in time in restraint.
To access this article, please choose from the options below
Supervising editor: Robert L. Wears, MD, MS
Author contributions: RTG and NG conceived of and designed the study. RTG, KW, and NG performed data collection. RTG and KW managed the data and oversaw data quality control. ATM provided statistical advice on study design. RTG and ATM analyzed the data. RTG drafted the article and all authors contributed to its revision. RTG takes responsibility for the paper as a whole.
Funding and support: By Annals policy, all authors are required to disclose any and all commercial, financial, and other relationships in any way related to the subject of this article that might create any potential conflict of interest. The authors have stated that no such relationships exist. See the Manuscript Submission Agreement in this issue for examples of specific conflicts covered by this statement.
Publication dates: Available online July 19, 2008.
Reprints not available from the authors.
PII: S0196-0644(08)00850-0
doi:10.1016/j.annemergmed.2008.05.035
© 2008 American College of Emergency Physicians. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Refers to article:
- Forcing Functions: The Need for Restraint , 26 August 2008
