Intérêt et utilisabilité du dossier pharmaceutique en pratique médicale. Enquête auprès de médecins et pharmaciens hospitaliers (étude MATRIX)

详细信息    查看全文

• 作者：M. Schuers^a ; ^b ; ^c ; ^{matthieu.schuers@gmail.com" class="auth_mail" title="E-mail the corresponding author} ; M. Timsit^d ; A. Gillibert^a ; ^b ; A. Fred^e ; N. Griffon^a ; ^b ; ^f ; J. Bé ; nichou^e ; S.J. Darmoni^a ; ^b ; ^f ; ^g ; ^h ; P. Staccini^d
• 关键词：Electronic health records ; Pharmacy ; Hospitals ; Information dissemination
• 刊名：Revue d'épidémiologie et de Santé Publique
• 出版年：2016
• 出版时间：September 2016
• 年：2016
• 卷：64
• 期：4
• 页码：229-236
• 全文大小：531 K

文摘

To evaluate the impact of the pharmaceutical patient record use in emergency, geriatric and anaesthesia and intensive care departments, an experimentation was launched in 2013 in 55 hospitals. The purpose of the study was to assess the opinions of physicians and pharmacists about the benefits and usability of the patient pharmaceutical record.

Methods

An e-mailed self-administered questionnaire was sent to all the pharmacists, anaesthesiologists, geriatricians and emergency physicians of the 55 hospitals involved in the patient pharmaceutical record experimentation. The questionnaire assessed the usability of the patient pharmaceutical record using the “System Usability Scale”, as well as its use, its benefits and limitations perceived in clinical practice, and overall user satisfaction. Questionnaires were collected from November 2014 to January 2015.

Results

Ninety-six questionnaires were collected, from 47 hospitals, representing 86% of the hospitals involved in the experimentation. The patient pharmaceutical record was effectively operational in 36 hospitals. Data from 73 questionnaires filled by physicians and pharmacists with potential experience with the patient pharmaceutical record were used for evaluation. Forty-two respondents were pharmacists (57%) and 31 were physicians (43%), including 13 geriatricians, 11 emergency physicians and 7 anaesthesiologists. Patient pharmaceutical record overall usability score was 62.5 out of 100. It did not vary with the profession or seniority of the respondent. It was positively correlated with the frequency of use. More than half of respondents reported that they never or uncommonly used the patient pharmaceutical record. The length of access to data period was considered as insufficient. Main obstacles to more utilization of the patient pharmaceutical record were the lack of information about the dosage of dispensed drugs, the low number of patients in possession of their health card and the low number of patients with an activated patient pharmaceutical record.

Conclusion

Two years after the beginning of the experiment aiming to broaden the access to the patient pharmaceutical record to physicians, these first evaluation results are encouraging. The evaluation of the consequences of the access to the patient pharmaceutical record for physicians remains necessary.