Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31368443›Full record

ArticleJournal of medical Internet research2019

Implementation of a Digitally Enabled Care Pathway (Part 2): Qualitative Analysis of Experiences of Health Care Professionals.

Alistair Connell, Georgia Black, Hugh Montgomery, Peter Martin, Claire Nightingale, Dominic King, Alan Karthikesalingam, Cían Hughes, Trevor Back, Kareem Ayoub and 9 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of medical Internet research, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
3.1field-weighted citation impact, top 9% of its field
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

19 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 33 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. 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

19 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.

Alistair ConnellCentre for Human Health and Performance, University College London, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0003-0318-1049
Georgia BlackDepartment of Applied Health Research, University College London, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0003-2676-5071
Hugh MontgomeryCentre for Human Health and Performance, University College London, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0001-8797-5019
Peter MartinDepartment of Applied Health Research, University College London, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0003-4638-0638
Claire NightingaleDepartment of Applied Health Research, University College London, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-4803-7617
Dominic KingDeepMind Health, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-1898-842X
Alan KarthikesalingamDeepMind Health, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0001-5074-898X
Cían HughesDeepMind Health, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0001-6901-0985
Trevor BackDeepMind Health, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-0567-8043
Kareem AyoubDeepMind Health, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-4147-3790
Mustafa SuleymanDeepMind Health, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-5415-4457
Gareth JonesRoyal Free London NHS Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0003-4601-1269
Jennifer CrossRoyal Free London NHS Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0001-9325-2773
Sarah StanleyRoyal Free London NHS Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-9427-7152
Mary EmersonRoyal Free London NHS Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0003-1835-7561
Charles MerrickRoyal Free London NHS Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-2122-3831
Geraint ReesFaculty of Life Sciences, University College London, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-9623-7007
Christopher LaingRoyal Free London NHS Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0003-2514-5823
Rosalind RaineDepartment of Applied Health Research, University College London, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0003-0904-749X
Google DeepMind (United Kingdom) · GBRoyal Free London NHS Foundation Trust · GBUniversity College London · GBFaculty (United Kingdom) · GBSt George's, University of London · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundOne reason for the introduction of digital technologies into health care has been to try to improve safety and patient outcomes by providing real-time access to patient data and enhancing communication among health care professionals. However, the adoption of such technologies into clinical pathways has been less examined, and the impacts on users and the broader health system are poorly understood. We sought to address this by studying the impacts of introducing a digitally enabled care pathway for patients with acute kidney injury (AKI) at a tertiary referral hospital in the United Kingdom. A dedicated clinical response team-comprising existing nephrology and patient-at-risk and resuscitation teams-received AKI alerts in real time via Streams, a mobile app. Here, we present a qualitative evaluation of the experiences of users and other health care professionals whose work was affected by the implementation of the care pathway.

objectiveThe aim of this study was to qualitatively evaluate the impact of mobile results viewing and automated alerting as part of a digitally enabled care pathway on the working practices of users and their interprofessional relationships.

methodsA total of 19 semistructured interviews were conducted with members of the AKI response team and clinicians with whom they interacted across the hospital. Interviews were analyzed using inductive and deductive thematic analysis.

resultsThe digitally enabled care pathway improved access to patient information and expedited early specialist care. Opportunities were identified for more constructive planning of end-of-life care due to the earlier detection and alerting of deterioration. However, the shift toward early detection also highlighted resource constraints and some clinical uncertainty about the value of intervening at this stage. The real-time availability of information altered communication flows within and between clinical teams and across professional groups.

conclusionsDigital technologies allow early detection of adverse events and of patients at risk of deterioration, with the potential to improve outcomes. They may also increase the efficiency of health care professionals' working practices. However, when planning and implementing digital information innovations in health care, the following factors should also be considered: the provision of clinical training to effectively manage early detection, resources to cope with additional workload, support to manage perceived information overload, and the optimization of algorithms to minimize unnecessary alerts.

Indexed as

FemaleHealth PersonnelHumansMaleQualitative ResearchTelemedicineacute kidney injurynephrology

Identifiers

PMID31368443
PMCPMC6693304
OpenAlexW2980470662

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.