Comparison of time spent writing orders on paper with computerized physician order entry

Kirstin Shu, Deborah Boyle, Cynthia Spurr, Jan Horsky, Heather Heiman, Paula O'Connor, John Lepore, David W. Bates*

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingConference contribution

90 Scopus citations


Computerized physician order entry (CPOE) has been shown to improve quality, and to reduce resource utilization, but most available data suggest that it takes longer to enter orders using CPOE. We had previously implemented a CPOE system, and elected to evaluate its impact on physician time in the new setting. To do this, we performed a prospective study using random reminder methodology. Key findings were that interns spent 9.0% of their time ordering with CPOE, compared to 2.1% before, although CPOE saved them an additional 2% of time, so that the net difference was 5% of their total time. However, this is counterbalanced by decreased time for other personnel such as nursing and pharmacy, and by the quality and efficiency changes. We conclude that while CPOE has many benefits, it represents a major process change, and organizations must factor this in when they implement it.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Title of host publicationMEDINFO 2001 - Proceedings of the 10th World Congress on Medical Informatics
PublisherIOS Press
Number of pages5
ISBN (Print)1586031945, 9781586031947
StatePublished - Jan 1 2001
Event10th World Congress on Medical Informatics, MEDINFO 2001 - London, United Kingdom
Duration: Sep 2 2005Sep 5 2005

Publication series

NameStudies in Health Technology and Informatics
ISSN (Print)0926-9630
ISSN (Electronic)1879-8365


Other10th World Congress on Medical Informatics, MEDINFO 2001
Country/TerritoryUnited Kingdom

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Biomedical Engineering
  • Health Informatics
  • Health Information Management


Dive into the research topics of 'Comparison of time spent writing orders on paper with computerized physician order entry'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this