Same Systems, Different Outcomes

Summary

Objectives: To compare the outcome of the implementation of computerized physician order entry (CPOE) systems in two Dutch hospitals.

Methods: Qualitative research methods, including interviews in both hospitals, observations of system in use, observations of staff meetings and document analysis were used to understand the implementation of CPOE. The transcribed texts and implementation documents were analyzed for relevant concepts.

The transcripts and field notes were analyzed using a heuristic success and failure model with medical work as the primary focus.

Results: Occasions that determined the outcome of the implementation were classified according to factors that may influence the success or failure of implementing systems.

Conclusions: The themes and patterns that emerged from the data helped validate the concept of medical work as the primary focus of our analysis model; in addition the concept of a support base necessary to accept changes in medical work that result from introducing CPOE may help to understand the different implementation outcomes.

Keywords

Hospital information systems - online systems - com-puterized medical records systems - computerized physician order entry - success and failure factors - qualitative research

• References

• 1 Hodge MH. History of the TDS medical information system. In: Blum BI, Duncan K. A history of medical informatics. Reading (MA):: Addison-Wesley Publishing Company; 1990: 328-44.
• 2 Ash JS, Gorman PN, Hersh WR. Physician order entry in U.S. hospitals. Proc AMIA Symp 1998; 235-9.
• 3 Kohn LT, Corrigan JM, Donaldson MS. To err is human, building a safer health system. Washington, D.C.:: National Academy Press; 2000
• 4 Committee on Quality of Health Care in America. Crossing the quality chasm, a new health system for the 21st century. Washington, D.C.:: National Academy Press; 2001
• 5 Overhage JM, Tierney WM, Zhou XH, McDonald CJ. A randomized trial of “corollary orders” to prevent errors of omission. J Am Med Inform Assoc 1997; 4 (05) 364-75.
• 6 Bates DW, Leape LL, Cullen DJ, Laird N, Petersen LA, Teich JM. et al. Effect of computerized physician order entry and a team intervention on prevention of serious medication errors. JAMA 1998; 280 (15) 1311-6.
• 7 Bates DW, Gawande AA. Improving safety with information technology. N Engl J Med 2003; 348 (25) 2526-34.
• 8 Massaro TA. Introducing physician order entry at a major academic medical center: I. Impact on organizational culture and behavior. Acad Med 1993; 68 (01) 20-5.
• 9 Ash J, Gorman P, Lavelle M, Lyman J, Fournier L. Investigating physician order entry in the field: lessons learned in a multi-center study. Medinfo 2001; 10 (02) 1107-11.
• 10 Doolan DF, Bates DW. Computerized physician order entry systems in hospitals: mandates and incentives. Health Aff (Millwood) 2002; 21 (04) 180-8.
• 11 Ash JS, Gorman PN, Seshadri V, Hersh WR. Computerized physician order entry in U.S. hospitals: results of a 2002 survey. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2004; 11 (02) 95-9.
• 12 Ash JS, Berg M, Coiera E. Some unintended consequences of information technology in health care: the nature of patient care information system- related errors. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2004; 11 (02) 104-12.
• 13 Berg M, Aarts J, Van Der Lei J. ICT in health care: sociotechnical approaches. Methods Inf Med 2003; 42 (04) 297-301.
• 14 Lucas Jr HC. Why information systems fail. New York:: Columbia University Press; 1975
• 15 Sauer C. Deciding the future for IS failures – not the choice you might think. In: Currie WL, Galliers RD. Rethinking management information systems: an interdisciplinary perspective. Oxford:: Oxford University Press; 1999: 279-309.
• 16 Markus ML. Power, politics, and MIS implementation. Commun ACM 1983; 26 (06) 430-44.
• 17 Myers MD. A disaster for everyone to see: an interpretive analysis of a failed IS project. Accounting, Management & Information Technology 1994; 4 (04) 185-201.
• 18 Sauer C. Why information systems fail: a case study approach. Henley-on-Thames:: Alfred Waller; 1993
• 19 Beynon-Davies P. Human error and information systems failure: the case of the London ambulance service computer-aided despatch system project. Interact Comput 1999; 11 (06) 699-720.
• 20 Freidson E. Professional dominance: the social structure of medical care. New York:: Aldine Publishing Company; 1970
• 21 Freidson E. The centrality of professionalism to health care. Jurimetrics 1990; 30 (04) 431-45.
• 22 Berg M. The search for synergy: interrelating medical work and patient care information systems. Methods Inf Med 2003; 42 (04) 337-44.
• 23 Ciborra C, Hanseth O. From tool to Gestell, agendas for managing the information infrastructure. Inf Technol People 1998; 11 (04) 305-27.
• 24 Strauss AL, Fagerhaugh S, Suczek B, Wiener C. Social organization of medical work. Chicago:: The University of Chicago Press; 1985
• 25 Aarts J, Doorewaard H, Berg M. Understanding implementation: the case of a computerized physician order entry system in a large Dutch university medical center. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2004; 11 (03) 207-16.
• 26 Patton MQ. Qualitative research and evaluation methods. Thousand Oaks:: Sage Publications; 2002
• 27 Goorman E. Results regarding the function of clinical information system: a sociological perspective [Bevindingen aangaande de werking van twee klinische informatiesystemen: een sociologisch perspectief] [unpublished master’s dissertation]. Maastricht:: Maastricht University; 1997
• 28 Goorman E, Berg M. Modelling nursing activities: electronic patient records and their discontents. Nurs Inq 2000; 7 (01) 3-9.
• 29 Aarts J, Bergen C, Berg M. Care o’Line in use, a qualitative assessment of the functionality of a hospital information system compared with the state-of-art in Dutch hospitals [Care o’Line in gebruik]. Rotterdam: Institute of Health Policy and Management, Erasmus University Medical Center; June. 2002
• 30 Kalmeijer MD, Holtzer W, van Dongen R, Guchelaar HJ. Implementation of a computerized physician medication order entry system at the Academic Medical Centre in Amsterdam. Pharm World Sci 2003; 25 (03) 88-93.
• 31 Carpenter JD, Gorman PN. What’s so special about medications: a pharmacist’s observations from the POE study. Proc AMIA Symp 2001; 95-9.
• 32 Starr P. The social transformation of American medicine. New York:: Basic Books; 1982
• 33 Shortell SM, Alexander JA, Budetti PP, Burns LR, Gillies RR, Waters TM. et al. Physician-system alignment: introductory overview. Med Care 2001; 39 (Suppl. 07) (Suppl. 01) (01) 1-8.
• 34 Reiser SJ. Medicine and the reign of technology. Cambridge:: Cambridge University Press; 1978
• 35 Poley MJ, Bouwmans CA, Hanff LM, Roos PJ, van Ineveld BM. Efficiency of different systems for medication distribution in an academic children's hospital in The Netherlands. Pharm World Sci 2004; 26 (02) 83-9.
• 36 Østerlund C. Mapping medical work: documenting practices across multiple medical settings. J Cent Inf Stud (Japan) 2004; 5 (03) 35-43.
• 37 Ash JS, Gorman PN, Lavelle M, Stavri PZ, Lyman J, Fournier L. et al. Perceptions of physician order entry: results of a cross-site qualitative study. Methods Inf Med 2003; 42 (04) 313-23.
• 38 Lester H, Tritter JQ. Medical error: a discussion of the medical construction of error and suggestions for reforms of medical education to decrease error. Med Educ 2001; 35 (09) 855-61.
• 39 Berg M, Langenberg C, vd Berg I, Kwakkernaat J. Considerations for sociotechnical design: experiences with an electronic patient record in a clinical context. Int J Med Inf 1998; 52 (01) (03) 243-51.
• 40 While AE, Biggs KS. Benefits and challenges of nurse prescribing. J Adv Nurs 2004; 45 (06) 559-67.