Andrew Georgiou1, Julie Li1, Judith Thomas1, Maria R Dahm1,2. 1. Centre for Health Systems and Safety Research, Australian Institute of Health Innovation, Macquarie University, Sydney, Australia. 2. College of Arts and Social Sciences, Institute for Communication in Health Care, Australian National University, Canberra, Australia.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Suboptimal design of health information technology (IT) systems can lead to the introduction of errors in the diagnostic process. We aimed to identify mechanisms that can affect the safety and effectiveness of these systems in hospital settings thus contributing to the building of an explicit and replicable understanding of the variables that can affect the functioning of IT systems. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This qualitative study drew from observations and semistructured interviews from a purposive sample of 46 participants (26 emergency department and 20 laboratory and medical imaging staff) across 3 Australian hospitals. Iterative, inductive coding of the data led to the development of higher-level themes based on relationships between codes. RESULTS: Two overarching themes emerged: (1) usability and safety of the electronic test result management system; and (2) system redesign considerations about who is meant to follow up, when and how. The usability and safety of digital systems and the way these systems deal with accountability processes are triggered by mechanisms that are contextually dependent. DISCUSSION: Our findings highlighted the multitransactional nature of the test result management process involving numerous healthcare professionals across different settings. This communication requires integration of the systems utilized by different departments and transparency of the test result follow-up process to facilitate clear lines of responsibility and accountability. CONCLUSION: Identifying mechanisms that shape the functionality and sustainability of electronic result management can offer a valuable appreciation of key elements that need to be accounted for, and the circumstances in which they need to operate effectively.
OBJECTIVE: Suboptimal design of health information technology (IT) systems can lead to the introduction of errors in the diagnostic process. We aimed to identify mechanisms that can affect the safety and effectiveness of these systems in hospital settings thus contributing to the building of an explicit and replicable understanding of the variables that can affect the functioning of IT systems. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This qualitative study drew from observations and semistructured interviews from a purposive sample of 46 participants (26 emergency department and 20 laboratory and medical imaging staff) across 3 Australian hospitals. Iterative, inductive coding of the data led to the development of higher-level themes based on relationships between codes. RESULTS: Two overarching themes emerged: (1) usability and safety of the electronic test result management system; and (2) system redesign considerations about who is meant to follow up, when and how. The usability and safety of digital systems and the way these systems deal with accountability processes are triggered by mechanisms that are contextually dependent. DISCUSSION: Our findings highlighted the multitransactional nature of the test result management process involving numerous healthcare professionals across different settings. This communication requires integration of the systems utilized by different departments and transparency of the test result follow-up process to facilitate clear lines of responsibility and accountability. CONCLUSION: Identifying mechanisms that shape the functionality and sustainability of electronic result management can offer a valuable appreciation of key elements that need to be accounted for, and the circumstances in which they need to operate effectively.
Authors: Daniel R Murphy; Ashley N D Meyer; Elise Russo; Dean F Sittig; Li Wei; Hardeep Singh Journal: JAMA Intern Med Date: 2016-04 Impact factor: 21.873
Authors: Anuj K Dalal; Adam Schaffer; Esteban F Gershanik; Ranganath Papanna; Katyuska Eibensteiner; Nyryan V Nolido; Cathy S Yoon; Deborah Williams; Stuart R Lipsitz; Christopher L Roy; Jeffrey L Schnipper Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2018-03-12 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: Hardeep Singh; Eric J Thomas; Dean F Sittig; Lindsey Wilson; Donna Espadas; Myrna M Khan; Laura A Petersen Journal: Am J Med Date: 2010-03 Impact factor: 4.965
Authors: Martin C Were; Xiaochun Li; Joe Kesterson; Jason Cadwallader; Chite Asirwa; Babar Khan; Marc B Rosenman Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2009-07-03 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: Maria R Dahm; Andrew Georgiou; Robert Herkes; Anthony Brown; Julie Li; Robert Lindeman; Andrea R Horvath; Graham Jones; Michael Legg; Ling Li; David Greenfield; Johanna I Westbrook Journal: Diagnosis (Berl) Date: 2018-11-27
Authors: Joanne Callen; Richard Paoloni; Julie Li; Michael Stewart; Kathryn Gibson; Andrew Georgiou; Jeffrey Braithwaite; Johanna Westbrook Journal: Ann Emerg Med Date: 2012-10-18 Impact factor: 5.721
Authors: Shailaja Menon; Michael W Smith; Dean F Sittig; Nancy J Petersen; Sylvia J Hysong; Donna Espadas; Varsha Modi; Hardeep Singh Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2014-11-11 Impact factor: 2.692
Authors: Andrew Georgiou; Julie Li; Judith Thomas; Maria R Dahm; Johanna I Westbrook Journal: J Am Med Inform Assoc Date: 2019-07-01 Impact factor: 4.497