This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) All Versions of this Article: M1427v1 11/2/95    most recent Submit a response Alert me when this article is cited Alert me when eLetters are posted Alert me if a correction is posted Services Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Ash, J. S. Articles by Hersh, W. R. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Ash, J. S. Articles by Hersh, W. R.

Computerized Physician Order Entry in U.S. Hospitals: Results of a 2002 Survey

Affiliation of the authors: Department of Medical Informatics and Clinical Epidemiology, School of Medicine, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR, USA

Correspondence and reprints: Joan S. Ash, PhD, Department of Medical Informatics and Clinical Epidemiology, School of Medicine, Oregon Health & Science University, 3181 SW Sam Jackson Park Road, Portland, OR 97201-3098; e-mail: <ash{at}ohsu.edu>.

Received for publication: 07/15/03; accepted for publication: 10/20/03.

Objective: To determine the availability of inpatient computerized physician order entry in U.S. hospitals and the degree to which physicians are using it.

Design: Combined mail and telephone survey of 964 randomly selected hospitals, contrasting 2002 data and results of a survey conducted in 1997.

Measurements: Availability: computerized order entry has been installed and is available for use by physicians; inducement: the degree to which use of computers to enter orders is required of physicians; participation: the proportion of physicians at an institution who enter orders by computer; and saturation: the proportion of total orders at an institution entered by a physician using a computer.

Results: The response rate was 65%. Computerized order entry was not available to physicians at 524 (83.7%) of 626 hospitals responding, whereas 60 (9.6%) reported complete availability and 41 (6.5%) reported partial availability. Of 91 hospitals providing data about inducement/requirement to use the system, it was optional at 31 (34.1%), encouraged at 18 (19.8%), and required at 42 (46.2%). At 36 hospitals (45.6%), more than 90% of physicians on staff use the system, whereas six (7.6%) reported 51–90% participation and 37 (46.8%) reported participation by fewer than half of physicians. Saturation was bimodal, with 25 (35%) hospitals reporting that more than 90% of all orders are entered by physicians using a computer and 20 (28.2%) reporting that less than 10% of all orders are entered this way.

Conclusion: Despite increasing consensus about the desirability of computerized physician order entry (CPOE) use, these data indicate that only 9.6% of U.S. hospitals presently have CPOE completely available. In those hospitals that have CPOE, its use is frequently required. In approximately half of those hospitals, more than 90% of physicians use CPOE; in one-third of them, more than 90% of orders are entered via CPOE.