Download PDF
CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 · Appl Clin Inform 2023; 14(04): 735-742
DOI: 10.1055/s-0043-1771392
Research Article

System Configuration Evaluation for a Province-Wide Clinical Information System Using the eSafety Checklist

Reed T. Sutton
1   eQuality and eSafety Program, Provincial Patient Safety, Alberta Health Services, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
2   Division of Gastroenterology, Department of Medicine, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
,
Pritma Dhillon-Chattha
1   eQuality and eSafety Program, Provincial Patient Safety, Alberta Health Services, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
,
Jason Kumagai
3   Human Factors Program, Provincial Patient Safety, Alberta Health Services, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
,
Tiffany Pitamber
3   Human Factors Program, Provincial Patient Safety, Alberta Health Services, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
,
David P. Meurer
1   eQuality and eSafety Program, Provincial Patient Safety, Alberta Health Services, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
› Author Affiliations
› Further Information
Also available at
   Permissions and Reprints

Corrected by:

Erratum: System Configuration Evaluation for a Province-Wide Clinical Information System Using the eSafety ChecklistAppl Clin Inform 2023; 14(04): e1-e1
DOI: 10.1055/s-0044-1779302

Abstract

Background According to Digital Health Canada 2013 eSafety Guidelines, an estimated one-third of patient safety incidents following implementation of clinical information systems (CISs) are technology-related. An eSafety checklist was previously developed to improve CIS safety by providing a comprehensive listing of system-agnostic, evidence-based configuration recommendations.

Objectives We sought to use the checklist to support safe initial configuration of a provincial system-wide CIS (Alberta, Canada), referred to as Connect Care.

Methods The checklist was applied to 13 Connect Care modules in three successive phases. First, the checklist was adapted to an abbreviated high-priority version. Second, demonstrations of each module were recorded. Finally, independent evaluation of each recording was conducted by two eSafety evaluators using the abbreviated eSafety checklist.

Results All modules achieved greater than 72% compliance, with an average of 84%. Overall, 273 opportunities for improvement were identified, with four major areas or themes emerging: (1) inconsistent date and time, (2) unclear patient identification, (3) ineffective alert system, and (4) insufficient decision support. These opportunities were forwarded to the appropriate build teams for review and implementation.

Conclusion This work is the first to utilize the eSafety checklist in a real-world CIS, which will become one of the largest in Canada. The checklist has shown clinical applicability in identifying gaps in CIS configuration and should be considered for use in future and pre-existing CISs.

Keywords

electronic health records - patient safety - informatics - information systems

Protection of Human and Animal Subjects

According to the policy activities that constitute research at Alberta Health Services, this work met criteria for operational improvement activities exempt from ethics review.


Supplementary Material



Publication History

Received: 14 December 2022

Accepted: 05 May 2023

Article published online:
13 September 2023

© 2023. The Author(s). This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonDerivative-NonCommercial License, permitting copying and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit. Contents may not be used for commercial purposes, or adapted, remixed, transformed or built upon. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)

Georg Thieme Verlag KG
Rüdigerstraße 14, 70469 Stuttgart, Germany

 

  • References

  • 1 Islam MM, Poly TN, Li YJ. Recent advancement of clinical information systems: opportunities and challenges. Yearb Med Inform 2018; 27 (01) 83-90
    Thieme ConnectPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 2 Westbrook JI, Reckmann M, Li L. et al. Effects of two commercial electronic prescribing systems on prescribing error rates in hospital in-patients: a before and after study. PLoS Med 2012; 9 (01) e1001164
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 3 Kushniruk AW, Triola MM, Borycki EM, Stein B, Kannry JL. Technology induced error and usability: the relationship between usability problems and prescription errors when using a handheld application. Int J Med Inform 2005; 74 (7–8): 519-526
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 4 Walker JM, Carayon P, Leveson N. et al. EHR safety: the way forward to safe and effective systems. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2008; 15 (03) 272-277
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 5 Dhillon-Chattha P, McCorkle R, Borycki E. An evidence-based tool for safe configuration of electronic health records: the eSafety checklist. Appl Clin Inform 2018; 9 (04) 817-830
    Thieme ConnectPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 6 Koppel R. Response to: an evidence-based tool for safe configuration of electronic health records: the eSafety checklist. Appl Clin Inform 2018; 9 (04) 831-832
    Thieme ConnectPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 7 Co Z, Holmgren AJ, Classen DC. et al. The development and piloting of the ambulatory electronic health record evaluation tool: lessons learned. Appl Clin Inform 2021; 12 (01) 153-163
    Thieme ConnectPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 8 Sittig DF, Ash JS, Singh H. The SAFER guides: empowering organizations to improve the safety and effectiveness of electronic health records. Am J Manag Care 2014; 20 (05) 418-423
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 9 Sittig DF, Sengstack P, Singh H. Guidelines for US hospitals and clinicians on assessment of electronic health record safety using SAFER guides. JAMA 2022; 327 (08) 719-720
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 10 Institute of Medicine Committee on Data Standards for Patient. Aspden P, Corrigan JM, Wolcott J, Erickson SM. eds. Patient Safety: Achieving a New Standard for Care. Washington, DC: National Academies Press; 2004
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 11 Mao X, Jia P, Zhang L, Zhao P, Chen Y, Zhang M. An evaluation of the effects of human factors and ergonomics on health care and patient safety practices: a systematic review. PLoS One 2015; 10 (06) e0129948
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 12 Braun CC, Silver NC. Interaction of signal word and colour on warning labels: differences in perceived hazard and behavioural compliance. Ergonomics 1995; 38 (11) 2207-2220
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 13 Phansalkar S, Edworthy J, Hellier E. et al. A review of human factors principles for the design and implementation of medication safety alerts in clinical information systems. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2010; 17 (05) 493-501
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 14 Rush JL, Ibrahim J, Saul K, Brodell RT. Improving patient safety by combating alert fatigue. J Grad Med Educ 2016; 8 (04) 620-621
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 15 Khalifa M, Zabani I. Improving utilization of clinical decision support systems by reducing alert fatigue: Strategies and recommendations. Stud Health Technol Inform 2016; 226: 51-54
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 16 Sittig DF, Murphy DR, Smith MW, Russo E, Wright A, Singh H. Graphical display of diagnostic test results in electronic health records: a comparison of 8 systems. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2015; 22 (04) 900-904
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar