TY - JOUR
T1 - Adoption of anesthesia information management systems by US anesthesiologists
AU - Trentman, Terrence L.
AU - Mueller, Jeff T.
AU - Ruskin, Keith J.
AU - Noble, Brie N.
AU - Doyle, Christine A.
N1 - Funding Information:
AIMS advantages (N = 593) More accurate clinical documentation Improved regulatory compliance Reduced workload for anesthesiologist Improved patient safety Increased revenue, capture of charges Better data for quality improvement Improved operating room efficiency Easier tracking of supplies Better data for research No advantages over paper record AIMS barriers (N = 290) (installed, installing, selected or searching for an AIMS) Initial cost—lack of funding Inadequate return on investment Lack of expertise/champion among anesthesia colleagues Competition for funding from other information technology (IT) projects Ongoing IT costs Lack of IT support dedicated specifically to AIMS Lack of system that meets anesthesiologist’s needs Lack of system that integrates with institution’s EMR Fear of inaccurate records, legal implications Lack of support from hospital administration Resistance from anesthesiologists No clear benefit over paper record
Funding Information:
The authors wish to thank Celeste Kirschner of the ASA for assistance with survey distribution, Jason Byrd JD and Chip Amoe JD, ASA, Office of Governmental Affairs, for editorial assistance regarding ‘‘meaningful use’’ regulation, and Donna Goede of the Survey Research Center, Mayo Clinic Rochester, for assistance with survey development. This study is funded by Mayo Clinic Arizona.
PY - 2011/4
Y1 - 2011/4
N2 - Objective: Electronic medical records (EMR) may increase the safety and efficiency of healthcare. Anesthesia care is a significant component of the perioperative period, yet little is known about the adoption of anesthesia information management systems (AIMS) by US anesthesiologists, particularly in non-academic settings. Herein, we report the results of a survey of US anesthesiologists regarding adoption of AIMS and anesthesiologist-perceived advantages and barriers to AIMS adoption. Methods: Using the e-mail database of the American Society of Anesthesiologists, we solicited randomly selected US anesthesiologists to participate in a survey of their AIMS adoption, perceived advantages and barriers to AIMS. Two and then 3 weeks after the initial mailing, a follow-up e-mail was sent to each anesthesiologist. The study was closed 4 weeks after the initial mailing. Results: Five thousand anesthesiologists were solicited; 615 (12.3%) responses were received. Twenty-four percent of respondents had installed an AIMS, while 13% were either installing a system now or had selected one, and an additional 13% were actively searching. Larger anesthesiology groups with large case loads, urban settings, and government affiliated or academic institutions were more likely to have adopted AIMS. Initial cost was the most frequently cited AIMS barrier. The most commonly cited benefit was more accurate clinical documentation (79%), while unanticipated need for ongoing information technology support (49%) and difficult integration of AIMS with an existing EMR (61%) were the most commonly cited problems. There were no barriers cited significantly more often by non-adopters than adopters. Conclusions: At least 50% of our survey respondents were currently using, installing, planning to install, or searching for an AIMS. However, the strength of any conclusion is undermined by a low survey response rate and potential bias as respondents using or searching for an AIMS may be more likely to participate. Nonetheless, challenges exist for anesthesiologists considering AIMS adoption including cost. Furthermore, important questions remain regarding payment for anesthesia services and the relationship of AIMS and "meaningful use" as defined by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services.
AB - Objective: Electronic medical records (EMR) may increase the safety and efficiency of healthcare. Anesthesia care is a significant component of the perioperative period, yet little is known about the adoption of anesthesia information management systems (AIMS) by US anesthesiologists, particularly in non-academic settings. Herein, we report the results of a survey of US anesthesiologists regarding adoption of AIMS and anesthesiologist-perceived advantages and barriers to AIMS adoption. Methods: Using the e-mail database of the American Society of Anesthesiologists, we solicited randomly selected US anesthesiologists to participate in a survey of their AIMS adoption, perceived advantages and barriers to AIMS. Two and then 3 weeks after the initial mailing, a follow-up e-mail was sent to each anesthesiologist. The study was closed 4 weeks after the initial mailing. Results: Five thousand anesthesiologists were solicited; 615 (12.3%) responses were received. Twenty-four percent of respondents had installed an AIMS, while 13% were either installing a system now or had selected one, and an additional 13% were actively searching. Larger anesthesiology groups with large case loads, urban settings, and government affiliated or academic institutions were more likely to have adopted AIMS. Initial cost was the most frequently cited AIMS barrier. The most commonly cited benefit was more accurate clinical documentation (79%), while unanticipated need for ongoing information technology support (49%) and difficult integration of AIMS with an existing EMR (61%) were the most commonly cited problems. There were no barriers cited significantly more often by non-adopters than adopters. Conclusions: At least 50% of our survey respondents were currently using, installing, planning to install, or searching for an AIMS. However, the strength of any conclusion is undermined by a low survey response rate and potential bias as respondents using or searching for an AIMS may be more likely to participate. Nonetheless, challenges exist for anesthesiologists considering AIMS adoption including cost. Furthermore, important questions remain regarding payment for anesthesia services and the relationship of AIMS and "meaningful use" as defined by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services.
KW - anesthesia information management system
KW - electronic health records
KW - informatics
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=80052557050&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=80052557050&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1007/s10877-011-9289-x
DO - 10.1007/s10877-011-9289-x
M3 - Article
C2 - 21728057
AN - SCOPUS:80052557050
SN - 1387-1307
VL - 25
SP - 129
EP - 135
JO - Journal of Clinical Monitoring and Computing
JF - Journal of Clinical Monitoring and Computing
IS - 2
ER -