JMIR Publications

ABSTRACT

Background:

Controlled substances (CSs) are commonly used as analgesics or to treat neurodevelopmental disorders in healthcare, but they also pose a risk of drug abuse and diversion. Therefore, the distribution and handling of CSs are strictly regulated, and hospital pharmacies are required to manage CS surveillance in hospital settings. Between 2018 and 2021, a large Finnish academic hospital implemented a new electronic health record (EHR) system, enabling the digitalization of paper-based CS surveillance. By spring 2024, the electronic narcotic consumption card (eNCC) had been implemented in 84 wards. Although hundreds of healthcare professionals (HCPs) use eNCC daily, our understanding of the user experience with this process is limited.

Objective:

This study aimed to characterize user experience (UX) with the eNCC and compare UX across different dosage forms. Additionally, we aimed to assess whether the end user's professional role, years in practice, and years of EHR system use affect the UX, and how investigations and error corrections in CS surveillance have evolved since the implementation of eNCC.

Methods:

An electronic survey was conducted among HCPs working in wards and the hospital pharmacy in May 2024. The survey included background questions, statements using a five-point Likert scale, and one open-ended question. The study was reported in accordance with the Consensus-Based Checklist for Reporting of Survey Studies (CROSS).

Results:

There were 599 respondents (522 nurses, 21 physicians, 56 pharmacists) to the survey during the three-week response time. Our main finding was that HCPs preferred the eNCC process; 81% of respondents disagreed when asked if they were willing to return to the paper-based process. Additionally, HCPs considered eNCC to be effortless in daily work for both solid (85%) and liquid (72%) dosage forms. However, the eNCC process for solid dosage forms was reported to be more straightforward and faster than for liquid ones. Both nurses and pharmacists reported conducting more investigations and error corrections immediately after eNCC implementation than during the most recent month. Nevertheless, ward pharmacists performed more investigations and corrections than registered nurses at both specified time points.

Conclusions:

Most HCPs had rather positive attitudes toward eNCC, and they preferred eNCC over a paper-based process. This research highlights the importance of understanding the varying levels of interaction with the eNCC among different professional roles.