Sarah P Slight1, Casey Quinn2, Anthony J Avery3, David W Bates4, Aziz Sheikh5. 1. School of Medicine, Pharmacy and Health, University of Durham, Stockton-on-Tees, UK The Center for Patient Safety Research and Practice, Division of General Internal Medicine, The Center for Patient Safety Research and Practice, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, USA eHealth Research Group, Centre for Population Health Sciences, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK. 2. PRMA Consulting Ltd, Fleet, UK. 3. Division of Primary Care, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK. 4. The Center for Patient Safety Research and Practice, Division of General Internal Medicine, The Center for Patient Safety Research and Practice, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, USA Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA Harvard School of Public Health, Boston, Massachusetts, USA. 5. The Center for Patient Safety Research and Practice, Division of General Internal Medicine, The Center for Patient Safety Research and Practice, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, USA eHealth Research Group, Centre for Population Health Sciences, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: We conducted a prospective evaluation of different forms of electronic health record (EHR) systems to better understand the costs incurred during implementation and the factors that can influence these costs. METHODS: We selected a range of diverse organizations across three different geographical areas in England that were at different stages of implementing three centrally procured applications, that is, iSOFT's Lorenzo Regional Care, Cerner's Millennium, and CSE's RiO. 41 semi-structured interviews were conducted with hospital staff, members of the implementation team, and those involved in the implementation at a national level. RESULTS: Four main overarching cost categories were identified: infrastructure (eg, hardware and software), personnel (eg, training team), estates/facilities (eg, space), and other (eg, training materials). Many factors were felt to impact on these costs, with different hospitals choosing varying amounts and types of infrastructure, diverse training approaches for staff, and different software applications to integrate with the new system. CONCLUSIONS: Improving the quality and safety of patient care through EHR adoption is a priority area for UK and US governments and policy makers worldwide. With cost considered one of the most significant barriers, it is important for hospitals and governments to be clear from the outset of the major cost categories involved and the factors that may impact on these costs. Failure to adequately train staff or to follow key steps in implementation has preceded many of the failures in this domain, which can create new safety hazards. Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://group.bmj.com/group/rights-licensing/permissions.
OBJECTIVE: We conducted a prospective evaluation of different forms of electronic health record (EHR) systems to better understand the costs incurred during implementation and the factors that can influence these costs. METHODS: We selected a range of diverse organizations across three different geographical areas in England that were at different stages of implementing three centrally procured applications, that is, iSOFT's Lorenzo Regional Care, Cerner's Millennium, and CSE's RiO. 41 semi-structured interviews were conducted with hospital staff, members of the implementation team, and those involved in the implementation at a national level. RESULTS: Four main overarching cost categories were identified: infrastructure (eg, hardware and software), personnel (eg, training team), estates/facilities (eg, space), and other (eg, training materials). Many factors were felt to impact on these costs, with different hospitals choosing varying amounts and types of infrastructure, diverse training approaches for staff, and different software applications to integrate with the new system. CONCLUSIONS: Improving the quality and safety of patient care through EHR adoption is a priority area for UK and US governments and policy makers worldwide. With cost considered one of the most significant barriers, it is important for hospitals and governments to be clear from the outset of the major cost categories involved and the factors that may impact on these costs. Failure to adequately train staff or to follow key steps in implementation has preceded many of the failures in this domain, which can create new safety hazards. Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://group.bmj.com/group/rights-licensing/permissions.
Authors: Yong Y Han; Joseph A Carcillo; Shekhar T Venkataraman; Robert S B Clark; R Scott Watson; Trung C Nguyen; Hülya Bayir; Richard A Orr Journal: Pediatrics Date: 2005-12 Impact factor: 7.124
Authors: Saverio M Maviglia; Jane Y Yoo; Calvin Franz; Erica Featherstone; William Churchill; David W Bates; Tejal K Gandhi; Eric G Poon Journal: Arch Intern Med Date: 2007-04-23
Authors: Jesse C Crosson; Pamela A Ohman-Strickland; Deborah J Cohen; Elizabeth C Clark; Benjamin F Crabtree Journal: Ann Fam Med Date: 2012 May-Jun Impact factor: 5.166
Authors: Eyal Zimlichman; Carol Keohane; Calvin Franz; Wendy L Everett; Diane L Seger; Catherine Yoon; Alexander A Leung; Bismarck Cadet; Michael Coffey; Nathan E Kaufman; David W Bates Journal: Jt Comm J Qual Patient Saf Date: 2013-07
Authors: Aziz Sheikh; Tony Cornford; Nicholas Barber; Anthony Avery; Amirhossein Takian; Valentina Lichtner; Dimitra Petrakaki; Sarah Crowe; Kate Marsden; Ann Robertson; Zoe Morrison; Ela Klecun; Robin Prescott; Casey Quinn; Yogini Jani; Maryam Ficociello; Katerina Voutsina; James Paton; Bernard Fernando; Ann Jacklin; Kathrin Cresswell Journal: BMJ Date: 2011-10-17