ArticleBMJ health & care informatics2026
Complexities and capabilities of Scan4Safety in NHS hospitals: a qualitative study of a national demonstrator site.
Article in BMJ health & care informatics, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesData standards and barcoding technologies are implemented in hospitals to uniquely identify objects, people and locations; streamline the management of supplies and inventories; improve efficiency; reduce waste and improve patient safety and quality of care. This study examined the implementation of the Scan4Safety programme at one NHS demonstrator site to understand the hospital experience of adopting these standards, barcoding and related technologies.
methodsExploratory case study design, informed by information infrastructure theory, at one Scan4Safety demonstrator site. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with internal and external stakeholders (n=19), and 67 documents related to the Scan4Safety programme were identified. Interview transcripts and documents underwent thematic analysis.
resultsKey enablers for Scan4Safety included allocated funding, government role/regulation, executive buy-in/wide stakeholder involvement, patient focus, agile/adaptive approach and data linkage. Challenges were both internal and external, mainly pertaining to data quality, work-as-done and trade-offs. Mechanisms of anticipated positive outcomes and potential risks were also identified. DISCUSSION: Scan4Safety benefits are delivered through tracking and tracing capabilities, and automating data capture, alerts and data linkages. For traceability of devices, the benefits depend on the extent to which items are tracked in inventory and consistent barcode scanning at the point of care.
conclusionsLinked standards for identification of patients, products, places and procedures, across supplies and hospital processes, constitute a wide-ranging information infrastructure with the potential for significant value to patients and the whole health system.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.