Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27830241›Full record

ReviewYearbook of medical informatics2016

The Rising Frequency of IT Blackouts Indicates the Increasing Relevance of IT Emergency Concepts to Ensure Patient Safety.

Ulrich Sax, M Lipprandt, R Röhrig

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Yearbook of medical informatics, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Observational
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Ulrich Sax
M Lipprandt
R RöhrigProf. Dr. Rainer Röhrig, Carl von Ossietzky University, Department of Medical Informatics, 26111 Oldenburg, Germany, E-mail: Rainer.Roehrig@uni-oldenburg.de.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionAs many medical workflows depend vastly on IT support, great demands are placed on the availability and accuracy of the applications involved. The cases of IT failure through ransomware at the beginning of 2016 are impressive examples of the dependence of clinical processes on IT. Although IT risk management attempts to reduce the risk of IT blackouts, the probability of partial/total data loss, or even worse, data falsification, is not zero. The objective of this paper is to present the state of the art with respect to strategies, processes, and governance to deal with the failure of IT systems.

methodsThis article is conducted as a narrative review.

resultsWorst case scenarios are needed, dealing with methods as to how to survive the downtime of clinical systems, for example through alternative workflows. These workflows have to be trained regularly. We categorize the most important types of IT system failure, assess the usefulness of classic counter measures, and state that most risk management approaches fall short on exactly this matter.

conclusionTo ensure that continuous, evidence-based improvements to the recommendations for IT emergency concepts are made, it is essential that IT blackouts and IT disasters are reported, analyzed, and critically discussed. This requires changing from a culture of shame and blame to one of error and safety in healthcare IT. This change is finding its way into other disciplines in medicine. In addition, systematically planned and analyzed simulations of IT disaster may assist in IT emergency concept development.

Indexed as

Electronic Health RecordsEquipment FailureInformation SystemsHumansPatient SafetyRisk ManagementWorkflowClinical Information SystemElectronic Medical RecordsEquipment FailureITILPatient Safety

Identifiers

PMID27830241
PMCPMC5171553

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.