Success and Failure Factors in the Regional Health Information System Design Process

Summary

Objectives: To identify success and failure factors in the design process of a regional health information system.

Methods: A constructive evaluation study including interviews, observations, usability study and document analysis.

Results: Modelling was found to be a key element for the successful implementation of a health information system. The developed service chain model helped to define use cases and to implement seamless service chains. User participation in the design process was a success factor resulting in good user acceptance and signs of positive impacts on work practices. Evaluation study also helped system developers to guide the system’s further development. An important failure factor identified was the lack of semantic interoperability of the system components.

Conclusions: The results emphasize the socio-technical nature of health information systems. The starting point for development should be thorough insight into the health care work practices where the information systems are to be used. Successful system design should start from modelling of work processes, data and information flows and definition of concepts and their relations. Health informatics as a scientific discipline provides theories and models for the design and development process.

Keywords

Health information system - evaluation - design process - success - failure

• References

• 1 Nykänen P, Karimaa E. Evaluation of the Satakunta Macropilot: Models and solutions. In: Ohtonen J. Evaluation of the Satakunta Macropilot. STAKES Report 21, Helsinki 2002. (in Finnish) 52-72.
• 2 Kuhn KA, Giuse D. From hospital information systems to health information systems. Methods Inf Med 2001; 40: 275-87.
• 3 Friedman CP, Wyatt JC. Evaluation methods in medical informatics. New York:: Springer Verlag; 1997
• 4 Brender J. Methodology for assessment of medical IT-based systems. Technology and Informatics 42 Amsterdam: IOS Press; 1997
• 5 Briggs RO, deVreede G-J, Nunamaker JF, Sprague RH. Special issue: Information systems success. Editorial. J Manag Inf Sys 2003; 19 (04) 5-8.
• 6 Seddon PB, Staples S, Patnayakuni R, Bowtell M. Dimensions of information systems success. Communications of the Association for Information Systems, 1999; 2 article 20 http://cais.isworld.org/articles/2–20/article.html 47 5.9.2004
• 7 Avital M. Reexamining information systems success through the information technology professionals perspective. Sprouts: Working papers on information environments, systems and organizations. http://weatherhead.cwru.edu/sprouts/2003/030206.pdf 15 10.9.2004
• 8 DeLone W, McLean ER. Information systems success: The quest for dependent variable. Inf Sys Res 1992; 3 (01) 60-95.
• 9 DeLone W, McLean ER. The DeLone and McLean Model of Information Systems Success: A ten-year update. J Manag Inf Sys 2003; 19 (04) 9-30.
• 10 Lyytinen K. Expectation failure concept and systems analysts’ view of information system failures: results of an exploratory study. Inf and Manag 1988; 14: 45-56.
• 11 Lyytinen K. Different perspectives on Information Systems: Problems and solutions. ACM Computing Surveys 1987; 19 (01) 5-46.
• 12 Berg M. Patient care information systems and health care work: A socio-technical approach. Int J Med Inf 1999; 55: 87-101.
• 13 Lyytinen K, Robey D. Learning failure in information systems development. Inf Sys J 1999; 9: 85-101.
• 14 Friedman CP. Where is the science in medical informatics?. JAMIA 1995; 2 (01) 65-7.
• 15 Ammenwerth E, Brender J, Nykänen P, Prokosch U, Rigby M, Talmon JT. Visions and strategies to improve evaluation of health information systems. Int J Med Inf 2004; 73: 479-91.