The effects of interoperable information technology networks on patient safety: a realist synthesis

Background Interoperable networks connect information technology systems of different organisations, allowing professionals in one organisation to access patient data held in another one. Health policy-makers in many countries believe that they will improve the co-ordination of services and, hence, the quality of services and patient safety. To the best of our knowledge, there have not been any previous systematic reviews of the effects of these networks on patient safety. Objectives The aim of the study was to establish how, why and in what circumstances interoperable information technology networks improved patient safety, failed to do so or increased safety risks. The objectives of the study were to (1) identify programme theories and prioritise theories to review; (2) search systematically for evidence to test the theories; (3) undertake quality appraisal, and use included texts to support, refine or reject programme theories; (4) synthesise the findings; and (5) disseminate the findings to a range of audiences. Design Realist synthesis, including consultation with stakeholders in nominal groups and semistructured interviews. Settings and participants Following a stakeholder prioritisation process, several domains were reviewed: older people living at home requiring co-ordinated care, at-risk children living at home and medicines reconciliation services for any patients living at home. The effects of networks on services in health economies were also investigated. Intervention An interoperable network that linked at least two organisations, including a maximum of one hospital, in a city or region. Outcomes Increase, reduction or no change in patients’ risks, such as a change in the risk of taking an inappropriate medication. Results We did not find any detailed accounts of the ways in which interoperable networks are intended to work and improve patient safety. Theory fragments were identified and used to develop programme and mid-range theories. There is good evidence that there are problems with the co-ordination of services in each of the domains studied. The implicit hypothesis about interoperable networks is that they help to solve co-ordination problems, but evidence across the domains showed that professionals found interoperable networks difficult to use. There is insufficient evidence about the effectiveness of interoperable networks to allow us to establish how and why they affect patient safety. Limitations The lack of evidence about patient-specific measures of effectiveness meant that we were not able to determine ‘what works’, nor any variations in what works, when interoperable networks are deployed and used by health and social care professionals. Conclusions There is a dearth of evidence about the effects of interoperable networks on patient safety. It is not clear if the networks are associated with safer treatment and care, have no effects or increase clinical risks. Future work Possible future research includes primary studies of the effectiveness of interoperable networks, of economies of scope and scale and, more generally, on the value of information infrastructures. Study registration This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42017073004. Funding This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Services and Delivery Research programme and will be published in full in Health Services and Delivery Research; Vol. 8, No. 40. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information

The effects of interoperable information technology networks on patient safety: a realist synthesis

Background Interoperable networks connect information technology systems of different organisations, allowing professionals in one organisation to access patient data held in another one. Health policy-makers in many countries believe that they will improve the co-ordination of services and, hence, the quality of services and patient safety. To the best of our knowledge, there have not been any previous systematic reviews of the effects of these networks on patient safety. Objectives The aim of the study was to establish how, why and in what circumstances interoperable information technology networks improved patient safety, failed to do so or increased safety risks. The objectives of the study were to (1) identify programme theories and prioritise theories to review; (2) search systematically for evidence to test the theories; (3) undertake quality appraisal, and use included texts to support, refine or reject programme theories; (4) synthesise the findings; and (5) disseminate the findings to a range of audiences. Design Realist synthesis, including consultation with stakeholders in nominal groups and semistructured interviews. Settings and participants Following a stakeholder prioritisation process, several domains were reviewed: older people living at home requiring co-ordinated care, at-risk children living at home and medicines reconciliation services for any patients living at home. The effects of networks on services in health economies were also investigated. Intervention An interoperable network that linked at least two organisations, including a maximum of one hospital, in a city or region. Outcomes Increase, reduction or no change in patients’ risks, such as a change in the risk of taking an inappropriate medication. Results We did not find any detailed accounts of the ways in which interoperable networks are intended to work and improve patient safety. Theory fragments were identified and used to develop programme and mid-range theories. There is good evidence that there are problems with the co-ordination of services in each of the domains studied. The implicit hypothesis about interoperable networks is that they help to solve co-ordination problems, but evidence across the domains showed that professionals found interoperable networks difficult to use. There is insufficient evidence about the effectiveness of interoperable networks to allow us to establish how and why they affect patient safety. Limitations The lack of evidence about patient-specific measures of effectiveness meant that we were not able to determine ‘what works’, nor any variations in what works, when interoperable networks are deployed and used by health and social care professionals. Conclusions There is a dearth of evidence about the effects of interoperable networks on patient safety. It is not clear if the networks are associated with safer treatment and care, have no effects or increase clinical risks. Future work Possible future research includes primary studies of the effectiveness of interoperable networks, of economies of scope and scale and, more generally, on the value of information infrastructures. Study registration This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42017073004. Funding This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Services and Delivery Research programme and will be published in full in Health Services and Delivery Research; Vol. 8, No. 40. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information

Towards achieving interorganisational collaboration between health-care providers:a realist evidence synthesis

Background Interorganisational collaboration is currently being promoted to improve the performance of NHS providers. However, up to now, there has, to the best of our knowledge, been no systematic attempt to assess the effect of different approaches to collaboration or to understand the mechanisms through which interorganisational collaborations can work in particular contexts. Objectives Our objectives were to (1) explore the main strands of the literature about interorganisational collaboration and to identify the main theoretical and conceptual frameworks, (2) assess the empirical evidence with regard to how different interorganisational collaborations may (or may not) lead to improved performance and outcomes, (3) understand and learn from NHS evidence users and other stakeholders about how and where interorganisational collaborations can best be used to support turnaround processes, (4) develop a typology of interorganisational collaboration that considers different types and scales of collaboration appropriate to NHS provider contexts and (5) generate evidence-informed practical guidance for NHS providers, policy-makers and others with responsibility for implementing and assessing interorganisational collaboration arrangements. Design A realist synthesis was carried out to develop, test and refine theories about how interorganisational collaborations work, for whom and in what circumstances. Data sources Data sources were gathered from peer-reviewed and grey literature, realist interviews with 34 stakeholders and a focus group with patient and public representatives. Review methods Initial theories and ideas were gathered from scoping reviews that were gleaned and refined through a realist review of the literature. A range of stakeholder interviews and a focus group sought to further refine understandings of what works, for whom and in what circumstances with regard to high-performing interorganisational collaborations. Results A realist review and synthesis identified key mechanisms, such as trust, faith, confidence and risk tolerance, within the functioning of effective interorganisational collaborations. A stakeholder analysis refined this understanding and, in addition, developed a new programme theory of collaborative performance, with mechanisms related to cultural efficacy, organisational efficiency and technological effectiveness. A series of translatable tools, including a diagnostic survey and a collaboration maturity index, were also developed. Limitations The breadth of interorganisational collaboration arrangements included made it difficult to make specific recommendations for individual interorganisational collaboration types. The stakeholder analysis focused exclusively on England, UK, where the COVID-19 pandemic posed challenges for fieldwork. Conclusions Implementing successful interorganisational collaborations is a difficult, complex task that requires significant time, resource and energy to achieve the collaborative functioning that generates performance improvements. A delicate balance of building trust, instilling faith and maintaining confidence is required for high-performing interorganisational collaborations to flourish. Future work Future research should further refine our theory by incorporating other workforce and user perspectives. Research into digital platforms for interorganisational collaborations and outcome measurement are advocated, along with place-based and cross-sectoral partnerships, as well as regulatory models for overseeing interorganisational collaborations. Study registration The study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42019149009. Funding This project was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health and Social Care Delivery Research programme and will be published in full in Health and Social Care Delivery Research; Vol. 11, No. 6. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information

Energy coupling in short pulse laser solid interactions and its impact for space debris removal

Significant advances have been made over the last decade to improve the performance, efficiency, and contrast of high peak and average power laser systems, driven by their use in a wide variety of fields, from the industrial to the scientific. As the contrast of the lasers has improved, interactions with contrasts of 1012 are now routinely undertaken. At such high contrasts, there is negligible preplasma formation and the ionized surface layer created by subpicosecond-duration pulses typically forms a highly reflective "plasma mirror" capable of reflecting between 70% and 90% of the incident energy. Although such interactions are of significant interest for applications such as harmonic source production and to enable the underlying physics to be studied, their low absorption can limit their usefulness for applications such as space debris removal

Real-world post-deployment performance of a novel machine learning-based digital health technology for skin lesion assessment and suggestions for post-market surveillance

IntroductionDeep Ensemble for Recognition of Malignancy (DERM) is an artificial intelligence as a medical device (AIaMD) tool for skin lesion assessment.MethodsWe report prospective real-world performance from its deployment within skin cancer pathways at two National Health Service hospitals (UK) between July 2021 and October 2022.ResultsA total of 14,500 cases were seen, including patients 18–100 years old with Fitzpatrick skin types I–VI represented. Based on 8,571 lesions assessed by DERM with confirmed outcomes, versions A and B demonstrated very high sensitivity for detecting melanoma (95.0–100.0%) or malignancy (96.0–100.0%). Benign lesion specificity was 40.7–49.4% (DERM-vA) and 70.1–73.4% (DERM-vB). DERM identified 15.0–31.0% of cases as eligible for discharge.DiscussionWe show DERM performance in-line with sensitivity targets and pre-marketing authorisation research, and it reduced the caseload for hospital specialists in two pathways. Based on our experience we offer suggestions on key elements of post-market surveillance for AIaMDs

Institutional use of National Clinical Audits by healthcare providers

Rationale, aims, and objectives Healthcare systems worldwide devote significant resources towards collecting data to support care quality assurance and improvement. In the United Kingdom, National Clinical Audits are intended to contribute to these objectives by providing public reports of data on healthcare treatment and outcomes, but their potential for quality improvement in particular is not realized fully among healthcare providers. Here, we aim to explore this outcome from the perspective of hospital boards and their quality committees: an under‐studied area, given the emphasis in previous research on the audits' use by clinical teams. Methods We carried out semi‐structured, qualitative interviews with 54 staff in different clinical and management settings in five English National Health Service hospitals about their use of NCA data, and the circumstances that supported or constrained such use. We used Framework Analysis to identify themes within their responses. Results We found that members and officers of hospitals' governing bodies perceived an imbalance between the benefits to their institutions from National Clinical Audits and the substantial resources consumed by participating in them. This led some to question the audits' legitimacy, which could limit scope for improvements based on audit data, proposed by clinical teams. Conclusions Measures to enhance the audits' perceived legitimacy could help address these limitations. These include audit suppliers moving from an emphasis on cumulative, retrospective reports to real‐time reporting, clearly presenting the “headline” outcomes important to institutional bodies and staff. Measures may also include further negotiation between hospitals, suppliers and their commissioners about the nature and volume of data the latter are expected to collect; wider use by hospitals of routine clinical data to populate audit data fields; and further development of interactive digital technologies to help staff explore and report audit data in meaningful ways

Examination of England’s New Medicine Service (NMS) of complex health care interventions in community pharmacy

Background: Community pharmacies are increasingly commissioned to deliver new, complex health interventions in response to the growing demands on family doctors and secondary health care services. Little is known about how these complex interventions are being accommodated and translated into the community pharmacy setting and whether their aims and objectives are realized in practice. The New Medicine Service (NMS) is a complex medicine management intervention that aims to support patients’ adherence to newly prescribed medicines for a long-term condition. Objective: This study explores the recent implementation of the NMS in community pharmacies across England. It also seeks to understand how the service is becoming manifest in practice and what lessons can be learned for future service implementation. Methods: Structured, organizational ethnographic observations and in situ workplace interviews with pharmacists and support staff were undertaken within 23 English community pharmacies. Additionally, one-toone, semi-structured interviews were carried out with 47 community pharmacists and 11 general practitioners (GPs). Observational and interview data were transcribed and analysed thematically and guided by Damschroder’s consolidated framework for implementation research. Results: The NMS workload had been implemented and absorbed into pharmacists’ daily routines alongside existing responsibilities with no extra resources and little evidence of reduction in other responsibilities. Pharmacists were pragmatic, simplifying, and adapting the NMS to facilitate its delivery and using discretion to circumvent perceived non-essential paperwork. Pharmacist understanding of the NMS was found to impact on what they believed should be achieved from the service. Despite pharmacists holding positive views about the value of the NMS, not all were convinced of its perceived benefits and necessity, with reports that many consultations did not identify any problems with the patients’ medicines. GPs were generally supportive of the initiative but were unaware of the service or potential benefits. Poorly developed existing pharmacist-GP relationships impeded implementation. Conclusions: This study identifies the multifaceted and complex processes involved in implementing a new community pharmacy service in England. Community pharmacy workflow, infrastructure, and public and professional relationships all affect NMS implementation. Greater prior engagement with the pharmacy workforce and GPs, robust piloting and a phased rollout together with ongoing support and updates, are potentials strategies to ensure future implementation of pharmacy services meet their intended aims in practice

Assessing the outcomes of participatory research: protocol for identifying, selecting, appraising and synthesizing the literature for realist review

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Participatory Research (PR) entails the co-governance of research by academic researchers and end-users. End-users are those who are affected by issues under study (<it>e.g.</it>, community groups or populations affected by illness), or those positioned to act on the knowledge generated by research (<it>e.g.</it>, clinicians, community leaders, health managers, patients, and policy makers). Systematic reviews assessing the generalizable benefits of PR must address: the diversity of research topics, methods, and intervention designs that involve a PR approach; varying degrees of end-user involvement in research co-governance, both within and between projects; and the complexity of outcomes arising from long-term partnerships.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>We addressed the above mentioned challenges by adapting realist review methodology to PR assessment, specifically by developing inductively-driven identification, selection, appraisal, and synthesis procedures. This approach allowed us to address the non-uniformity and complexity of the PR literature. Each stage of the review involved two independent reviewers and followed a reproducible, systematic coding and retention procedure. Retained studies were completed participatory health interventions, demonstrated high levels of participation by non-academic stakeholders (<it>i.e.</it>, excluding studies in which end-users were not involved in co-governing throughout the stages of research) and contained detailed descriptions of the participatory process and context. Retained sets are being mapped and analyzed using realist review methods.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>The librarian-guided search string yielded 7,167 citations. A total of 594 citations were retained after the identification process. Eighty-three papers remained after selection. Principle Investigators (PIs) were contacted to solicit all companion papers. Twenty-three sets of papers (23 PR studies), comprising 276 publications, passed appraisal and are being synthesized using realist review methods.</p> <p>Discussion</p> <p>The systematic and stage-based procedure addressed challenges to PR assessment and generated our robust understanding of complex and heterogeneous PR practices. To date, realist reviews have focussed on evaluations of relatively uniform interventions. In contrast our PR search yielded a wide diversity of partnerships and research topics. We therefore developed tools to achieve conceptual clarity on the PR field, as a beneficial precursor to our theoretically-driven synthesis using realist methods. Findings from the ongoing review will be provided in forthcoming publications.</p