Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24028694›Full record

ArticleThe Milbank quarterly2013

Improving quality and safety of care using "technovigilance": an ethnographic case study of secondary use of data from an electronic prescribing and decision support system.

Mary Dixon-Woods, Sabi Redwood, Myles Leslie, Joel Minion, Graham P Martin, Jamie J Coleman

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The Milbank quarterly, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

25 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Systematic review and narrative synthesis of computerized audit and feedback systems in healthcare.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2022
    Pooled it
  2. Routine Health Information Systems in the European Context: A Systematic Review of Systematic Reviews.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021
    Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Trial
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Observational
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Observational
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Mary Dixon-WoodsUniversity of Leicester.
Sabi Redwood
Myles Leslie
Joel Minion
Graham P Martin
Jamie J Coleman

Funding

Department of Health 0770017Wellcome Trust 097899
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

context"Meaningful use" of electronic health records to improve quality of care has remained understudied. We evaluated an approach to improving patients' safety and quality of care involving the secondary use of data from a hospital electronic prescribing and decision support system (ePDSS).

methodsWe conducted a case study of a large English acute care hospital with a well-established ePDSS. Our study was based on ethnographic observations of clinical settings (162 hours) and meetings (28 hours), informal conversations with clinical staff, semistructured interviews with ten senior executives, and the collection of relevant documents. Our data analysis was based on the constant comparative method.

findingsThis hospital's approach to quality and safety could be characterized as "technovigilance." It involved treating the ePDSS as a warehouse of data on clinical activity and performance. The hospital converted the secondary data into intelligence about the performance of individuals, teams, and clinical services and used this as the basis of action for improvement. Through a combination of rapid audit, feedback to clinical teams, detailed and critical review of apparent omissions in executive-led meetings, a focus on personal professional responsibility for patients' safety and quality care, and the correction of organizational or systems defects, technovigilance was-based on the hospital's own evidence-highly effective in improving specific indicators. Measures such as the rate of omitted doses of medication showed marked improvement. As do most interventions, however, technovigilance also had unintended consequences. These included the risk of focusing attention on aspects of patient safety made visible by the system at the expense of other, less measurable but nonetheless important, concerns.

conclusionsThe secondary use of electronic data can be effective for improving specific indicators of care if accompanied by a range of interventions to ensure proper interpretation and appropriate action. But care is needed to avoid unintended consequences.

Indexed as

Decision Support Systems, ClinicalMedical Order Entry SystemsPatient SafetyPublishingQuality ImprovementElectronic Health RecordsEnglandFeedbackHumansMedication ErrorsOrganizational InnovationQuality Indicators, Health CareQuality of Health CareState Medicineelectronic health recordsethnographymeaningful usemedication errorspatient safetyquality of care

Identifiers

PMID24028694
PMCPMC3790520

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.