PACS integrated situational alignment framework: a quantitative approach for successful PACS alignment and performance assessment in hospitals

Hospitals are investing in Information Technology and Information Systems in order to improve their processes and workflow and hence, to optimize patient care. Picture Archiving and Communications Systems (PACS) have seen gradual uptake in hospitals to achieve this goal. PACS implementations and the consecutive expansion and integration with the Electronic Patient Record requires massive investments and cultural changes by hospital (clinical) staff prior and during organizational adoption. It is therefore essential that these systems are aligned properly with the hospital operations. Alignment approaches for PACS implementations and appropriate assessment methods have been underexposed in scientific literature. In this paper, we propose the PACS integrated situational alignment (PISA) Framework, a theoretical framework that is designed for the continuous assessment, monitoring, successful alignment of PACS, and performance measures for PACS deployment in the hospital enterprise. In addition, we set out a research agenda to elaborate on this elementary topic

E-health and e-welfare of Finland : Check Point 2022

The report provides an overview of progressive nationwide activities towards better e-services in Finland. The information system services of social welfare and health care are monitored by systematic gathering, analysis, and use of data, which allows the tracking of the progress of operations and the realisation of goals. In 2020 and 2021, six data collections were carried out to produce data for the monitoring of the Finnish ‘Information to support well-being and service renewal, eHealth and eSocial Strategy’. Some of the results presented in the report are also openly available in database cubes

The Promise of Health Information Technology: Ensuring that Florida's Children Benefit

Substantial policy interest in supporting the adoption of Health Information Technology (HIT) by the public and private sectors over the last 5 -- 7 years, was spurred in particular by the release of multiple Institute of Medicine reports documenting the widespread occurrence of medical errors and poor quality of care (Institute of Medicine, 1999 & 2001). However, efforts to focus on issues unique to children's health have been left out of many of initiatives. The purpose of this report is to identify strategies that can be taken by public and private entities to promote the use of HIT among providers who serve children in Florida

Usability problems do not heal by themselves : National survey on physicians' experiences with EHRs in Finland

Purpose: Survey studies of health information systems use tend to focus on availability of functionalities, adoption and intensity of use. Usability surveys have not been systematically conducted by any healthcare professional groups on a national scale on a repeated basis. This paper presents results from two cross-sectional surveys of physicians' experiences with the usability of currently used EHR systems in Finland. The research questions were: To what extent has the overall situation improved between 2010 and 2014? What differences are there between healthcare sectors? Methods: In the spring of 2014, a survey was conducted in Finland using a questionnaire that measures usability and respondents' user experiences with electronic health record (EHR) systems. The survey was targeted to physicians who were actively doing clinical work. Twenty-four usability-related statements, that were identical in 2010 and 2014, were analysed from the survey. The respondents were also asked to give an overall rating of the EHR system they used. The study data comprised responses from 3081 physicians from the year 2014 and from 3223 physicians in the year 2010, who were using the nine most commonly used EHR system brands in Finland. Results: Physicians' assessments of the usability of their EHR system remain as critical as they were in 2010. On a scale from 1 ('fail') to 7 ('excellent') the average of overall ratings of their principally used EHR systems varied from 3.2 to 4.4 in 2014 (and in 2010 from 2.5 to 4.3). The results show some improvements in the following EHR functionalities and characteristics: summary view of patient's health status, prevention of errors associated with medication ordering, patient's medication list as well as support for collaboration and information exchange between the physician and the nurses. Even so, support for cross-organizational collaboration between physicians and for physician-patient collaboration were still considered inadequate. Satisfaction with technical features had not improved in four years. The results show marked differences between the EHR system brands as well as between healthcare sectors (private sector, public hospitals, primary healthcare). Compared to responses from the public sector, physicians working in the private sector were more satisfied with their EHR systems with regards to statements about user interface characteristics and support for routine tasks. Overall, the study findings are similar to our previous study conducted in 2010. Conclusions: Surveys about the usability of EHR systems are needed to monitor their development at regional and national levels. To our knowledge, this study is the first national eHealth observatory questionnaire that focuses on usability and is used to monitor the long-term development of EHRs. The results do not show notable improvements in physician's ratings for their EHRs between the years 2010 and 2014 in Finland. Instead, the results indicate the existence of serious problems and deficiencies which considerably hinder the efficiency of EHR use and physician's routine work. The survey results call for considerable amount of development work in order to achieve the expected benefits of EHR systems and to avoid technology-induced errors which may endanger patient safety. The findings of repeated surveys can be used to inform healthcare providers, decision makers and politicians about the current state of EHR usability and differences between brands as well as for improvements of EHR usability. This survey will be repeated in 2017 and there is a plan to include other healthcare professional groups in future surveys. (C) 2016 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ireland Ltd.Peer reviewe