Objective

The US CDC identified prescription drug monitoring programs (PDMPs) as a tool to address the contemporary opioid crisis, but few studies have investigated PDMP usability and effectiveness from the users' perspective. Even fewer have considered how practices differ across medical domains. In this study, we aimed to address these gaps, soliciting perspectives on PDMPs from providers contending with the opioid crisis: physicians working in emergency departments (EDs) and pain management clinics. We aimed to provide practical design recommendations to improve PDMP workflow integration, as well as controlled substance history retrieval, interpretation, and decision support.

Methods

We conducted 16 in-depth semi-structured interviews with practicing emergency and pain physicians regarding their procedures, problems, and proposed solutions surrounding their use of CURES, California's PDMP. We investigated design problems in CURES by combining users' feedback with our usability inspection, drawing upon an extensive body of design literature. Then, we generated alternatives using design methods.

Results

We found CURES's design did not accommodate the unique information needs of different medical domains. Further, clinicians had trouble accessing CURES and retrieving patients' controlled substance histories, mainly due to usability problems that could be addressed with little technical adjustment. Additionally, CURES rendered patient histories in large, cluttered tables, devoid of overview or context, making interpretation difficult and precarious. Lastly, our interviewees had rarely noticed or used advanced features, such as decision support.

Discussion and conclusion

Usability barriers inhibited adoption and effective use. We provide practical recommendations for improving opioid control by way of improving PDMP design, based on interviewees' suggestions and research-based design principles. Our findings have implications for other disciplines, including surgery and primary care.

OBJECTIVE: Physicians of all specialties experienced unprecedented stressors during the COVID-19 pandemic, exacerbating preexisting burnout. We examine burnouts association with perceived and actionable electronic health record (EHR) workload factors and personal, professional, and organizational characteristics with the goal of identifying levers that can be targeted to address burnout. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Survey of physicians of all specialties in an academic health center, using a standard measure of burnout, self-reported EHR work stress, and EHR-based work assessed by the number of messages regarding prescription reauthorization and use of a staff pool to triage messages. Descriptive and multivariable regression analyses examined the relationship among burnout, perceived EHR work stress, and actionable EHR work factors. RESULTS: Of 1038 eligible physicians, 627 responded (60% response rate), 49.8% reported burnout symptoms. Logistic regression analysis suggests that higher odds of burnout are associated with physicians feeling higher level of EHR stress (odds ratio [OR], 1.15; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.07-1.25), having more prescription reauthorization messages (OR, 1.23; 95% CI, 1.04-1.47), not feeling valued (OR, 3.38; 95% CI, 1.69-7.22) or aligned in values with clinic leaders (OR, 2.81; 95% CI, 1.87-4.27), in medical practice for ≤15 years (OR, 2.57; 95% CI, 1.63-4.12), and sleeping for <6 h/night (OR, 1.73; 95% CI, 1.12-2.67). DISCUSSION: Perceived EHR stress and prescription reauthorization messages are significantly associated with burnout, as are non-EHR factors such as not feeling valued or aligned in values with clinic leaders. Younger physicians need more support. CONCLUSION: A multipronged approach targeting actionable levers and supporting young physicians is needed to implement sustainable improvements in physician well-being.