W K Evans1, F D Ashbury2, G L Hogue3, A Smith4, J Pun5. 1. Department of Oncology, Faculty of Health Sciences, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON. 2. Dalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON. ; Division of Preventive Oncology, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB. ; Illawarra Health and Medical Research Institute, University of Wollongong, New South Wales, Australia. ; Intelligent Improvement Consultants, Toronto, ON. 3. Insightful Solutions, Englewood, CO, U.S.A. 4. ADS Consulting Solutions, Ancaster, ON. 5. Intelligent Improvement Consultants, Toronto, ON.
Abstract
RATIONALE: Paper-based medical record systems are known to have major problems of inaccuracy, incomplete data, poor accessibility, and challenges to patient confidentiality. They are also an inefficient mechanism of record-sharing for interdisciplinary patient assessment and management, and represent a major problem for keeping current and monitoring quality control to facilitate improvement. To address those concerns, national, regional, and local health care authorities have increased the pressure on oncology practices to upgrade from paper-based systems to electronic health records. OBJECTIVES: Here, we describe and discuss the challenges to implementing a region-wide oncology information system across four independent health care organizations, and we describe the lessons learned from the initial phases that are now being applied in subsequent activities of this complex project. RESULTS: The need for change must be shared across centres to increase buy-in, adoption, and implementation. It is essential to establish physician leadership, commitment, and engagement in the process. Work processes had to be revised to optimize use of the new system. Culture change must be included in the change management strategy. Furthermore, training and resource requirements must be thoroughly planned, implemented, monitored, and modified as required for effective adoption of new work processes and technology. Interfaces must be established with multiple existing electronic systems across the region to ensure appropriate patient flow. Periodic assessment of the existing project structure is necessary, and adjustments are often required to ensure that the project meets its objectives. CONCLUSIONS: The implementation of region-wide oncology information systems across different health practice locations has many challenges. Leadership is essential. A strong, collaborative information-sharing strategy across the region and with the supplier is essential to identify, discuss, and resolve implementation problems. A structure that supports project management and accountability contributes to success.
RATIONALE: Paper-based medical record systems are known to have major problems of inaccuracy, incomplete data, poor accessibility, and challenges to patient confidentiality. They are also an inefficient mechanism of record-sharing for interdisciplinary patient assessment and management, and represent a major problem for keeping current and monitoring quality control to facilitate improvement. To address those concerns, national, regional, and local health care authorities have increased the pressure on oncology practices to upgrade from paper-based systems to electronic health records. OBJECTIVES: Here, we describe and discuss the challenges to implementing a region-wide oncology information system across four independent health care organizations, and we describe the lessons learned from the initial phases that are now being applied in subsequent activities of this complex project. RESULTS: The need for change must be shared across centres to increase buy-in, adoption, and implementation. It is essential to establish physician leadership, commitment, and engagement in the process. Work processes had to be revised to optimize use of the new system. Culture change must be included in the change management strategy. Furthermore, training and resource requirements must be thoroughly planned, implemented, monitored, and modified as required for effective adoption of new work processes and technology. Interfaces must be established with multiple existing electronic systems across the region to ensure appropriate patient flow. Periodic assessment of the existing project structure is necessary, and adjustments are often required to ensure that the project meets its objectives. CONCLUSIONS: The implementation of region-wide oncology information systems across different health practice locations has many challenges. Leadership is essential. A strong, collaborative information-sharing strategy across the region and with the supplier is essential to identify, discuss, and resolve implementation problems. A structure that supports project management and accountability contributes to success.
Entities:
Keywords:
Electronic medical records; implementation; oncology information systems
Authors: Richard Hillestad; James Bigelow; Anthony Bower; Federico Girosi; Robin Meili; Richard Scoville; Roger Taylor Journal: Health Aff (Millwood) Date: 2005 Sep-Oct Impact factor: 6.301
Authors: Fredrick D Ashbury; Lisa Madlensky; Peter Raich; Mark Thompson; Geoff Whitney; Ken Hotz; Boris Kralj; William S Edell Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2003-03-06 Impact factor: 3.603
Authors: Amanda L Terry; Cathy F Thorpe; Gavin Giles; Judith Belle Brown; Stewart B Harris; Graham J Reid; Amardeep Thind; Moira Stewart Journal: Can Fam Physician Date: 2008-05 Impact factor: 3.275
Authors: Wilfred Ngwa; Beatrice W Addai; Isaac Adewole; Victoria Ainsworth; James Alaro; Olusegun I Alatise; Zipporah Ali; Benjamin O Anderson; Rose Anorlu; Stephen Avery; Prebo Barango; Noella Bih; Christopher M Booth; Otis W Brawley; Jean-Marie Dangou; Lynette Denny; Jennifer Dent; Shekinah N C Elmore; Ahmed Elzawawy; Diane Gashumba; Jennifer Geel; Katy Graef; Sumit Gupta; Serigne-Magueye Gueye; Nazik Hammad; Laila Hessissen; Andre M Ilbawi; Joyce Kambugu; Zisis Kozlakidis; Simon Manga; Lize Maree; Sulma I Mohammed; Susan Msadabwe; Miriam Mutebi; Annet Nakaganda; Ntokozo Ndlovu; Kingsley Ndoh; Jerry Ndumbalo; Mamsau Ngoma; Twalib Ngoma; Christian Ntizimira; Timothy R Rebbeck; Lorna Renner; Anya Romanoff; Fidel Rubagumya; Shahin Sayed; Shivani Sud; Hannah Simonds; Richard Sullivan; William Swanson; Verna Vanderpuye; Boateng Wiafe; David Kerr Journal: Lancet Oncol Date: 2022-05-09 Impact factor: 54.433
Authors: Anna Janssen; Melissa Brunner; Melanie Keep; Monique Hines; Srivalli Vilapakkam Nagarajan; Candice Kielly-Carroll; Sarah Dennis; Zoe McKeough; Tim Shaw Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2017-10-25 Impact factor: 3.390