Literature DB >> 25843931

Understanding barriers and facilitators to the use of Clinical Information Systems for intensive care units and Anesthesia Record Keeping: A rapid ethnography.

Jason J Saleem1, William R Plew2, Ross C Speir2, Jennifer Herout2, Nancy R Wilck2, Dale Marie Ryan3, Theresa A Cullen4, Jean M Scott5, Murielle S Beene3, Toni Phillips3.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: This study evaluated the current use of commercial-off-the-shelf Clinical Information Systems (CIS) for intensive care units (ICUs) and Anesthesia Record Keeping (ARK) for operating rooms and post-anesthesia care recovery settings at three Veterans Affairs Medical Centers (VAMCs). Clinicians and administrative staff use these applications at bedside workstations, in operating rooms, at nursing stations, in physician's rooms, and in other various settings. The intention of a CIS or an ARK system is to facilitate creation of electronic records of data, assessments, and procedures from multiple medical devices. The US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Office of the Chief of Nursing Informatics sought to understand usage barriers and facilitators to optimize these systems in the future. Therefore, a human factors study was carried out to observe the CIS and ARK systems in use at three VAMCs in order to identify best practices and suggested improvements to currently implemented CIS and ARK systems.
METHODS: We conducted a rapid ethnographic study of clinical end-users interacting with the CIS and ARK systems in the critical care and anesthesia care areas in each of three geographically distributed VAMCs. Two observers recorded interactions and/or interview responses from 88 CIS and ARK end-users. We coded and sorted into logical categories field notes from 69 shadowed participants. The team transcribed and combined data from key informant interviews with 19 additional participants with the observation data. We then integrated findings across observations into meaningful patterns and abstracted the data into themes, which translated directly to barriers to effective adoption and optimization of the CIS and ARK systems.
RESULTS: Effective optimization of the CIS and ARK systems was impeded by: (1) integration issues with other software systems; (2) poor usability; (3) software challenges; (4) hardware challenges; (5) training concerns; (6) unclear roles and lack of coordination among stakeholders; and (7) insufficient technical support. Many of these barriers are multi-faceted and have associated sub-barriers, which are described in detail along with relevant quotes from participants. In addition, regionalized purchases of different CIS and ARK systems, as opposed to enterprise level purchases, contributed to some of the identified barriers. Facilitators to system use included (1) automation and (2) a dedicated facility-level CIS-ARK Coordinator.
CONCLUSIONS: We identified barriers that explain some of the challenges with the optimization of the CIS and ARK commercial systems across the Veterans Health Administration (VHA). To help address these barriers, and evolve them into facilitators, we categorized report findings as (1) interface and system-level changes that vendors or VA healthcare systems can implement; (2) implementation factors under VA control and not under VA control; and (3) factors that may be used to inform future application purchases. We outline several recommendations for improved adoption of CIS and ARK systems and further recommend that human factors engineering and usability requirements become an integral part of VA health information technology (HIT) application procurement, customization, and implementation in order to help eliminate or mitigate some of the barriers of use identified in this study. Human factors engineering methods can be utilized to apply a user-centered approach to application requirements specification, application evaluation, system integration, and application implementation. Published by Elsevier Ireland Ltd.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Anesthesia Record Keeping (ARK); Clinical Information Systems (CIS); Human factors engineering; Intensive care units (ICUs); Sociotechnical systems; Usability; User centered design

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 25843931      PMCID: PMC5600485          DOI: 10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2015.03.006

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Med Inform        ISSN: 1386-5056            Impact factor:   4.046


  22 in total

1.  A framework for epistemological analysis in empirical (laboratory and field) studies.

Authors:  Y Xiao; K J Vicente
Journal:  Hum Factors       Date:  2000       Impact factor: 2.888

2.  Categorizing the unintended sociotechnical consequences of computerized provider order entry.

Authors:  Joan S Ash; Dean F Sittig; Richard H Dykstra; Kenneth Guappone; James D Carpenter; Veena Seshadri
Journal:  Int J Med Inform       Date:  2006-06-21       Impact factor: 4.046

3.  Multimethod evaluation of information and communication technologies in health in the context of wicked problems and sociotechnical theory.

Authors:  Johanna I Westbrook; Jeffrey Braithwaite; Andrew Georgiou; Amanda Ampt; Nerida Creswick; Enrico Coiera; Rick Iedema
Journal:  J Am Med Inform Assoc       Date:  2007-08-21       Impact factor: 4.497

4.  A sociotechnical perspective of health information technology.

Authors:  Jos Aarts
Journal:  Int J Med Inform       Date:  2013-10-26       Impact factor: 4.046

5.  ICU nurses' acceptance of electronic health records.

Authors:  Pascale Carayon; Randi Cartmill; Mary Ann Blosky; Roger Brown; Matthew Hackenberg; Peter Hoonakker; Ann Schoofs Hundt; Evan Norfolk; Tosha B Wetterneck; James M Walker
Journal:  J Am Med Inform Assoc       Date:  2011-06-22       Impact factor: 4.497

6.  Flexibility in interaction: sociotechnical design of an operating room scheduler.

Authors:  Per Erlend Hasvold; Jeremiah Scholl
Journal:  Int J Med Inform       Date:  2011-07-23       Impact factor: 4.046

Review 7.  A human factors engineering conceptual framework of nursing workload and patient safety in intensive care units.

Authors:  Pascale Carayon; Ayşe P Gürses
Journal:  Intensive Crit Care Nurs       Date:  2005-02-24       Impact factor: 3.072

8.  Patient care information systems and health care work: a sociotechnical approach.

Authors:  M Berg
Journal:  Int J Med Inform       Date:  1999-08       Impact factor: 4.046

Review 9.  Anatomy of a failure: a sociotechnical evaluation of a laboratory physician order entry system implementation.

Authors:  Linda W Peute; Jos Aarts; Piet J M Bakker; Monique W M Jaspers
Journal:  Int J Med Inform       Date:  2009-07-28       Impact factor: 4.046

10.  The science of human factors: separating fact from fiction.

Authors:  Alissa L Russ; Rollin J Fairbanks; Ben-Tzion Karsh; Laura G Militello; Jason J Saleem; Robert L Wears
Journal:  BMJ Qual Saf       Date:  2013-04-16       Impact factor: 7.035

View more
  14 in total

1.  A comparative observational study of inpatient clinical note-entry and reading/retrieval styles adopted by physicians.

Authors:  Rubina F Rizvi; Kathleen A Harder; Gretchen M Hultman; Terrence J Adam; Michael Kim; Serguei V S Pakhomov; Genevieve B Melton
Journal:  Int J Med Inform       Date:  2016-03-02       Impact factor: 4.046

2.  Operationalizing an Implementation Framework to Disseminate a Care Coordination Program for Rural Veterans.

Authors:  Chelsea Leonard; Heather Gilmartin; Marina McCreight; Lynette Kelley; Brandi Lippmann; Ashlea Mayberry; Andrew Coy; Emily Lawrence; Robert E Burke
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2019-05       Impact factor: 5.128

3.  Usability Evaluation of Electronic Health Record System around Clinical Notes Usage-An Ethnographic Study.

Authors:  Rubina F Rizvi; Jenna L Marquard; Gretchen M Hultman; Terrence J Adam; Kathleen A Harder; Genevieve B Melton
Journal:  Appl Clin Inform       Date:  2017-12-14       Impact factor: 2.342

4.  Toward Designing Information Display to Support Critical Care. A Qualitative Contextual Evaluation and Visioning Effort.

Authors:  Melanie C Wright; Sherry Dunbar; Brekk C Macpherson; Eugene W Moretti; Guillherme Del Fiol; Jean Bolte; Jeffrey M Taekman; Noa Segall
Journal:  Appl Clin Inform       Date:  2016-10-05       Impact factor: 2.342

5.  Orders on file but no labs drawn: investigation of machine and human errors caused by an interface idiosyncrasy.

Authors:  Richard Schreiber; Dean F Sittig; Joan Ash; Adam Wright
Journal:  J Am Med Inform Assoc       Date:  2017-09-01       Impact factor: 4.497

6.  Clinician-Driven Design of VitalPAD-An Intelligent Monitoring and Communication Device to Improve Patient Safety in the Intensive Care Unit.

Authors:  Luisa Flohr; Shaylene Beaudry; K Taneille Johnson; Nicholas West; Catherine M Burns; J Mark Ansermino; Guy A Dumont; David Wensley; Peter Skippen; Matthias Gorges
Journal:  IEEE J Transl Eng Health Med       Date:  2018-03-05       Impact factor: 3.316

7.  Development of a Minimum Data Set (MDS) for C-Section Anesthesia Information Management System (AIMS).

Authors:  Mostafa Sheykhotayefeh; Reza Safdari; Marjan Ghazisaeedi; Seyed Hossein Khademi; Seyedeh Sedigheh Seyed Farajolah; Elham Maserat; Mohamad Jebraeily; Vahid Torabi
Journal:  Anesth Pain Med       Date:  2017-01-01

8.  Internet-based self-management support for adults with asthma: a qualitative study among patients, general practitioners and practice nurses on barriers to implementation.

Authors:  Johanna L van Gaalen; Leti van Bodegom-Vos; Moira J Bakker; Jiska B Snoeck-Stroband; Jacob K Sont
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2016-08-26       Impact factor: 2.692

9.  Exploring the role of the nurse manager in supporting point-of-care nurses' adoption of electronic health records: protocol for a qualitative research study.

Authors:  Gillian Strudwick; Richard G Booth; Ragnhildur I Bjarnadottir; Sarah Collins; Rani Srivastava
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2017-10-12       Impact factor: 2.692

10.  A methodology for generating a tailored implementation blueprint: an exemplar from a youth residential setting.

Authors:  Cara C Lewis; Kelli Scott; Brigid R Marriott
Journal:  Implement Sci       Date:  2018-05-16       Impact factor: 7.327

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.