Farah Magrabi1, Siaw Teng Liaw2, Diana Arachi3, William Runciman4, Enrico Coiera1, Michael R Kidd5. 1. Centre for Health Informatics, Australian Institute of Health Innovation, Macquarie University, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia. 2. Centre for Primary Health Care and Equity, University of New South Wales, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia. 3. School of Public Health and Community Medicine, UNSW Medicine, University of New South Wales, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia. 4. The School of Psychology, Social Work & Social Policy, University of South Australia, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia. 5. Faculty of Health Sciences, Flinders University, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To identify the categories of problems with information technology (IT), which affect patient safety in general practice. DESIGN: General practitioners (GPs) reported incidents online or by telephone between May 2012 and November 2013. Incidents were reviewed against an existing classification for problems associated with IT and the clinical process impacted. PARTICIPANTS AND SETTING: 87 GPs across Australia. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Types of problems, consequences and clinical processes. RESULTS: GPs reported 90 incidents involving IT which had an observable impact on the delivery of care, including actual patient harm as well as near miss events. Practice systems and medications were the most affected clinical processes. Problems with IT disrupted clinical workflow, wasted time and caused frustration. Issues with user interfaces, routine updates to software packages and drug databases, and the migration of records from one package to another generated clinical errors that were unique to IT; some could affect many patients at once. Human factors issues gave rise to some errors that have always existed with paper records but are more likely to occur and cause harm with IT. Such errors were linked to slips in concentration, multitasking, distractions and interruptions. Problems with patient identification and hybrid records generated errors that were in principle no different to paper records. CONCLUSIONS: Problems associated with IT include perennial risks with paper records, but additional disruptions in workflow and hazards for patients unique to IT, occasionally affecting multiple patients. Surveillance for such hazards may have general utility, but particularly in the context of migrating historical records to new systems and software updates to existing systems. Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://www.bmj.com/company/products-services/rights-and-licensing/.
OBJECTIVE: To identify the categories of problems with information technology (IT), which affect patient safety in general practice. DESIGN: General practitioners (GPs) reported incidents online or by telephone between May 2012 and November 2013. Incidents were reviewed against an existing classification for problems associated with IT and the clinical process impacted. PARTICIPANTS AND SETTING: 87 GPs across Australia. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Types of problems, consequences and clinical processes. RESULTS: GPs reported 90 incidents involving IT which had an observable impact on the delivery of care, including actual patient harm as well as near miss events. Practice systems and medications were the most affected clinical processes. Problems with IT disrupted clinical workflow, wasted time and caused frustration. Issues with user interfaces, routine updates to software packages and drug databases, and the migration of records from one package to another generated clinical errors that were unique to IT; some could affect many patients at once. Human factors issues gave rise to some errors that have always existed with paper records but are more likely to occur and cause harm with IT. Such errors were linked to slips in concentration, multitasking, distractions and interruptions. Problems with patient identification and hybrid records generated errors that were in principle no different to paper records. CONCLUSIONS: Problems associated with IT include perennial risks with paper records, but additional disruptions in workflow and hazards for patients unique to IT, occasionally affecting multiple patients. Surveillance for such hazards may have general utility, but particularly in the context of migrating historical records to new systems and software updates to existing systems. Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://www.bmj.com/company/products-services/rights-and-licensing/.
Entities:
Keywords:
General practice; Information technology; Patient safety
Authors: Manuel Vélez-Díaz-Pallarés; Ana María Álvarez Díaz; Teresa Gramage Caro; Noelia Vicente Oliveros; Eva Delgado-Silveira; María Muñoz García; Alfonso José Cruz-Jentoft; Teresa Bermejo-Vicedo Journal: Int J Clin Pharm Date: 2017-05-24
Authors: Anuj K Dalal; Theresa Fuller; Pam Garabedian; Awatef Ergai; Corey Balint; David W Bates; James Benneyan Journal: J Am Med Inform Assoc Date: 2019-06-01 Impact factor: 4.497
Authors: Chunya Huang; Ross Koppel; John D McGreevey; Catherine K Craven; Richard Schreiber Journal: Appl Clin Inform Date: 2020-11-11 Impact factor: 2.342
Authors: Arabella Clarke; Joy Adamson; Ian Watt; Laura Sheard; Paul Cairns; John Wright Journal: BMC Med Inform Decis Mak Date: 2016-06-04 Impact factor: 2.796