Analysis of Barriers to the Deployment of Health Information Systems: a Stakeholder Perspective

© 2018 The Author(s). This paper argues that the cross-analysis of barriers with stakeholders provides a richer picture than analyzing the barriers on their own, as most of the literature in this area does. To test this hypothesis, we used the data from 33 interviews across 19 different types of stakeholders that were involved in a telemedicine system for the Chronically-ill Patient. Our findings show encouraging results. For instance, it was found that the group of stakeholders who are directly related to the governance and policy-making identified most of the barriers. This finding may imply that this group is more aware of the challenges when implementing HIS, or it may suggest that this group poses more resistance due to the current economic and Organizational models in health care. It was also found that some barriers are cited by all stakeholders whereas others not, suggesting that some barriers may be more relevant than others

Protocol for the development of a CONSORT extension for RCTs using cohorts and routinely collected health data.

Background: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are often complex and expensive to perform. Less than one third achieve planned recruitment targets, follow-up can be labor-intensive, and many have limited real-world generalizability. Designs for RCTs conducted using cohorts and routinely collected health data, including registries, electronic health records, and administrative databases, have been proposed to address these challenges and are being rapidly adopted. These designs, however, are relatively recent innovations, and published RCT reports often do not describe important aspects of their methodology in a standardized way. Our objective is to extend the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) statement with a consensus-driven reporting guideline for RCTs using cohorts and routinely collected health data. Methods: The development of this CONSORT extension will consist of five phases. Phase 1 (completed) consisted of the project launch, including fundraising, the establishment of a research team, and development of a conceptual framework. In phase 2, a systematic review will be performed to identify publications (1) that describe methods or reporting considerations for RCTs conducted using cohorts and routinely collected health data or (2) that are protocols or report results from such RCTs. An initial "long list" of possible modifications to CONSORT checklist items and possible new items for the reporting guideline will be generated based on the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) and The REporting of studies Conducted using Observational Routinely-collected health Data (RECORD) statements. Additional possible modifications and new items will be identified based on the results of the systematic review. Phase 3 will consist of a three-round Delphi exercise with methods and content experts to evaluate the "long list" and generate a "short list" of key items. In phase 4, these items will serve as the basis for an in-person consensus meeting to finalize a core set of items to be included in the reporting guideline and checklist. Phase 5 will involve drafting the checklist and elaboration-explanation documents, and dissemination and implementation of the guideline. Discussion: Development of this CONSORT extension will contribute to more transparent reporting of RCTs conducted using cohorts and routinely collected health data

An Ontological Model for Analyzing Liver Cancer Medical Reports

International audienc

Attitude of physicians towards automatic alerting in computerized physician order entry systems

Objectives: To analyze the attitude of physicians towards alerting in CPOE systems in different hospitals in different countries, addressing various organizational and technical settings and the view of physicians not currently using a CPOE. Methods:A cross-sectional quantitative and qualitative questionnaire survey. We invited 2,600 physicians in eleven hospitals from nine countries to participate. Eight of the hospitals had different CPOE systems in use, and three of the participating hospitals were not using a CPOE system. Results: 1,018 physicians participated. The general attitude of the physicians towards CPOE alerting is positive and is found to be mostly independent of the country, the specific organizational settings in the hospitals and their personal experience with CPOE systems. Both quantitative and qualitative results show that the majority of the physicians, both CPOE-users and non-users, appreciate the benefits of alerting in CPOE systems on medication safety. However, alerting should be better adapted to the clinical context and make use of more sophisticated ways to present alert information. The vast majority of physicians agree that additional information regarding interactions is useful on demand. Around half of the respondents see possible alert overload as a major problem; in this regard, physicians in hospitals with sophisticated alerting strategies show partly better attitude scores. Conclusions: Our results indicate that the way alerting information is presented to the physicians may play a role in their general attitude towards alerting, and that hospitals with a sophisticated alerting strategy with less interruptive alerts tend towards more positive attitudes. This aspect needs to be further investigated in future studies

Attitude of physicians towards automatic alerting in computerized physician order entry systems. A comparative international survey

OBJECTIVES: To analyze the attitude of physicians towards alerting in CPOE systems in different hospitals in different countries, addressing various organizational and technical settings and the view of physicians not currently using a CPOE. METHODS: A cross-sectional quantitative and qualitative questionnaire survey. We invited 2,600 physicians in eleven hospitals from nine countries to participate. Eight of the hospitals had different CPOE systems in use, and three of the participating hospitals were not using a CPOE system. RESULTS: 1,018 physicians participated. The general attitude of the physicians towards CPOE alerting is positive and is found to be mostly independent of the country, the specific organizational settings in the hospitals and their personal experience with CPOE systems. Both quantitative and qualitative results show that the majority of the physicians, both CPOE-users and non-users, appreciate the benefits of alerting in CPOE systems on medication safety. However, alerting should be better adapted to the clinical context and make use of more sophisticated ways to present alert information. The vast majority of physicians agree that additional information regarding interactions is useful on demand. Around half of the respondents see possible alert overload as a major problem; in this regard, physicians in hospitals with sophisticated alerting strategies show partly better attitude scores. CONCLUSIONS: Our results indicate that the way alerting information is presented to the physicians may play a role in their general attitude towards alerting, and that hospitals with a sophisticated alerting strategy with less interruptive alerts tend towards more positive attitudes. This aspect needs to be further investigated in future studies