“Moving to an electronic system should enhance the care we provide, rather than jeopardize it.” “We do not want a catastrophic event to occur in order to have our concerns heard.” “We do not feel that it is ethical to put patients at risk using a system that makes it difficult to ‘do the right thing’ and much easier to make a significant error.”

Nine weeks into the launch of a C$174 million Cerner EHR in March, emergency room and intensive care unit doctors Nanaimo Regional General Hospital in British Columbia, Canada reverted to paper orders and instructions out of concern for patient safety. Internists and others wanted to do the same. They formed a 250-member Medical Staff Association, which had enough concerns to go on the record with a report that included the above. One example: the lack of confidence in the electronic ordering system module for diagnostic tests, drugs and patient instructions was enough for sixty-one Association members to vote unanimously on a  “no confidence” motion in the system and a return to paper orders. The report also detailed “a multitude of physician-reported major safety issues from every department that deals with acute patient care.”

The B.C. provincial health authority, which in Canada’s system can overrule doctors and parent companies (Island Health), won’t remove the offending module, but is concerned enough to order additional resources and ongoing refinements, based on physician concerns and recommendations from a recent internal investigation. Island Health’s board also asked the health authority to: address fatigue in clinical staff and medical professionals; adjust resources to alleviate workload burden; Improve trust in the electronic health record and associated clinical care processes; work collaboratively with clinicians and medical staff to evaluate improvements in the electronic health record for quality and safe patient care. Times Colonist (BC)