Lynn McVey1,2, Natasha Alvarado3,4, Joanne Greenhalgh5, Mai Elshehaly4,6, Chris P Gale7, Julia Lake8, Roy A Ruddle9, Dawn Dowding10, Mamas Mamas11, Richard Feltbower7, Rebecca Randell3,4. 1. Faculty of Health Studies, University of Bradford, Bradford, UK. L.McVey@bradford.ac.uk. 2. Wolfson Centre for Applied Health Research, Bradford, UK. L.McVey@bradford.ac.uk. 3. Faculty of Health Studies, University of Bradford, Bradford, UK. 4. Wolfson Centre for Applied Health Research, Bradford, UK. 5. School of Sociology and Social Policy, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK. 6. Faculty of Engineering and Informatics, University of Bradford, Bradford, UK. 7. School of Medicine, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK. 8. Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust, Beckett Street, Leeds, UK. 9. School of Computing, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK. 10. School of Health Sciences, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK. 11. School of Primary, Community & Social Care, Keele University, Keele, UK.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Secondary use of data via integrated health information technology is fundamental to many healthcare policies and processes worldwide. However, repurposing data can be problematic and little research has been undertaken into the everyday practicalities of inter-system data sharing that helps explain why this is so, especially within (as opposed to between) organisations. In response, this article reports one of the most detailed empirical examinations undertaken to date of the work involved in repurposing healthcare data for National Clinical Audits. METHODS: Fifty-four semi-structured, qualitative interviews were carried out with staff in five English National Health Service hospitals about their audit work, including 20 staff involved substantively with audit data collection. In addition, ethnographic observations took place on wards, in 'back offices' and meetings (102 h). Findings were analysed thematically and synthesised in narratives. RESULTS: Although data were available within hospital applications for secondary use in some audit fields, which could, in theory, have been auto-populated, in practice staff regularly negotiated multiple, unintegrated systems to generate audit records. This work was complex and skilful, and involved cross-checking and double data entry, often using paper forms, to assure data quality and inform quality improvements. CONCLUSIONS: If technology is to facilitate the secondary use of healthcare data, the skilled but largely hidden labour of those who collect and recontextualise those data must be recognised. Their detailed understandings of what it takes to produce high quality data in specific contexts should inform the further development of integrated systems within organisations.
BACKGROUND: Secondary use of data via integrated health information technology is fundamental to many healthcare policies and processes worldwide. However, repurposing data can be problematic and little research has been undertaken into the everyday practicalities of inter-system data sharing that helps explain why this is so, especially within (as opposed to between) organisations. In response, this article reports one of the most detailed empirical examinations undertaken to date of the work involved in repurposing healthcare data for National Clinical Audits. METHODS: Fifty-four semi-structured, qualitative interviews were carried out with staff in five English National Health Service hospitals about their audit work, including 20 staff involved substantively with audit data collection. In addition, ethnographic observations took place on wards, in 'back offices' and meetings (102 h). Findings were analysed thematically and synthesised in narratives. RESULTS: Although data were available within hospital applications for secondary use in some audit fields, which could, in theory, have been auto-populated, in practice staff regularly negotiated multiple, unintegrated systems to generate audit records. This work was complex and skilful, and involved cross-checking and double data entry, often using paper forms, to assure data quality and inform quality improvements. CONCLUSIONS: If technology is to facilitate the secondary use of healthcare data, the skilled but largely hidden labour of those who collect and recontextualise those data must be recognised. Their detailed understandings of what it takes to produce high quality data in specific contexts should inform the further development of integrated systems within organisations.
Authors: Paul N Edwards; Matthew S Mayernik; Archer L Batcheller; Geoffrey C Bowker; Christine L Borgman Journal: Soc Stud Sci Date: 2011-10 Impact factor: 3.885
Authors: Joe Zhang; Harpreet Sood; Oliver Thomas Harrison; Ben Horner; Nikhil Sharma; Sanjay Budhdeo Journal: J R Soc Med Date: 2020-01-06 Impact factor: 5.344
Authors: Rebecca Randell; Natasha Alvarado; Lynn McVey; Joanne Greenhalgh; Robert M West; Amanda Farrin; Chris Gale; Roger Parslow; Justin Keen; Mai Elshehaly; Roy A Ruddle; Julia Lake; Mamas Mamas; Richard Feltbower; Dawn Dowding Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2020-02-25 Impact factor: 2.692
Authors: Alvin Richards-Belle; Izabella Orzechowska; Doug W Gould; Karen Thomas; James C Doidge; Paul R Mouncey; Michael D Christian; Manu Shankar-Hari; David A Harrison; Kathryn M Rowan Journal: Intensive Care Med Date: 2020-10-09 Impact factor: 17.440