Identifying patient safety problems associated with information technology in general practice: an analysis of incident reports

Objective To identify the categories of problems with information technology (IT), which affect patient safety in general practice. Design General practitioners (GPs) reported incidents online or by telephone between May 2012 and November 2013. Incidents were reviewed against an existing classification for problems associated with IT and the clinical process impacted. Participants and setting 87 GPs across Australia. Main outcome measure Types of problems, consequences and clinical processes. Results GPs reported 90 incidents involving IT which had an observable impact on the delivery of care, including actual patient harm as well as near miss events. Practice systems and medications were the most affected clinical processes. Problems with IT disrupted clinical workflow, wasted time and caused frustration. Issues with user interfaces, routine updates to software packages and drug databases, and the migration of records from one package to another generated clinical errors that were unique to IT; some could affect many patients at once. Human factors issues gave rise to some errors that have always existed with paper records but are more likely to occur and cause harm with IT. Such errors were linked to slips in concentration, multitasking, distractions and interruptions. Problems with patient identification and hybrid records generated errors that were in principle no different to paper records. Conclusions Problems associated with IT include perennial risks with paper records, but additional disruptions in workflow and hazards for patients unique to IT, occasionally affecting multiple patients. Surveillance for such hazards may have general utility, but particularly in the context of migrating historical records to new systems and software updates to existing systems.

[1]  R. Thomson,et al.  Towards an International Classification for Patient Safety: key concepts and terms , 2009, International journal for quality in health care : journal of the International Society for Quality in Health Care.

[2]  Graeme Miller,et al.  General Practice Activity in Australia 2013–14 , 2012 .

[3]  J A Cantrill,et al.  Patient safety features of clinical computer systems: questionnaire survey of GP views , 2005, Quality and Safety in Health Care.

[4]  Casimir A. Kulikowski,et al.  The dangerous decade , 2012, J. Am. Medical Informatics Assoc..

[5]  John McKay,et al.  A review of significant events analysed in general practice: implications for the quality and safety of patient care , 2009, BMC family practice.

[6]  M. Kidd,et al.  Patient safety events reported in general practice: a taxonomy , 2008, Quality & Safety in Health Care.

[7]  W. Runciman,et al.  An integrated framework for safety, quality and risk management: an information and incident management system based on a universal patient safety classification , 2006, Quality and Safety in Health Care.

[8]  Graeme Miller,et al.  Effect of computerisation on Australian general practice: does it improve the quality of care? , 2010, Quality in primary care.

[9]  David W. Bates,et al.  The use of health information technology in seven nations , 2008, Int. J. Medical Informatics.

[10]  E. Coiera,et al.  Quality of prescribing decision support in primary care: still a work in progress , 2009, The Medical journal of Australia.

[11]  Enrico Coiera Guide to health informatics , 2015 .

[12]  Aziz Sheikh,et al.  Prescribing safety features of general practice computer systems: evaluation using simulated test cases , 2004, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[13]  P. Sharek The Emergence of the Trigger Tool as the Premier Measurement Strategy for Patient Safety. , 2012, AHRQ WebM&M : morbidity & mortality rounds on the Web.

[14]  Christopher Pearce,et al.  Usability: a critical dimension for assessing the quality of clinical systems. , 2009, Informatics in primary care.

[15]  P. Norton,et al.  Safety incidents in family medicine , 2011, BMJ quality & safety.

[16]  David W. Bates,et al.  Errors associated with outpatient computerized prescribing systems , 2011, J. Am. Medical Informatics Assoc..

[17]  Christian Nøhr,et al.  A comparative review of patient safety initiatives for national health information technology , 2013, Int. J. Medical Informatics.

[18]  Joan S. Ash,et al.  Overdependence on Technology: An Unintended Adverse Consequence of Computerized Provider Order Entry , 2007, AMIA.

[19]  A. Sheikh,et al.  Improving general practice computer systems for patient safety: qualitative study of key stakeholders , 2007, Quality and Safety in Health Care.

[20]  Enrico Coiera Why e‐health is so hard , 2013, The Medical journal of Australia.

[21]  D. Bates,et al.  Improving safety with information technology. , 2003, The New England journal of medicine.

[22]  C. Kalkman,et al.  Feasibility of centre-based incident reporting in primary healthcare: the SPIEGEL study , 2011, Quality and Safety in Health Care.

[23]  George Hripcsak,et al.  Detecting adverse events for patient safety research: a review of current methodologies , 2003, J. Biomed. Informatics.

[24]  Farah Magrabi,et al.  Using FDA reports to inform a classification for health information technology safety problems , 2012, J. Am. Medical Informatics Assoc..

[25]  W B Runciman,et al.  Setting priorities for patient safety , 2002, Quality & safety in health care.

[26]  Julian A Smith A call for national e‐health clinical safety governance , 2012, The Medical journal of Australia.

[27]  Farah Magrabi,et al.  Clinical safety of England's national programme for IT: A retrospective analysis of all reported safety events 2005 to 2011 , 2015, Int. J. Medical Informatics.

[28]  E Coiera,et al.  Section 1: Health and Clinical Mangement: The Safety and Quality of Decision Support Systems , 2006, Yearbook of Medical Informatics.

[29]  W B Runciman,et al.  Crisis management during anaesthesia: the development of an anaesthetic crisis management manual , 2005, Quality and Safety in Health Care.

[30]  Michelle Sweidan,et al.  Quality of drug interaction alerts in prescribing and dispensing software , 2009, The Medical journal of Australia.

[31]  Farah Magrabi,et al.  A systematic review of the psychological literature on interruption and its patient safety implications , 2012, J. Am. Medical Informatics Assoc..

[32]  Farah Magrabi,et al.  An analysis of computer-related patient safety incidents to inform the development of a classification , 2010, J. Am. Medical Informatics Assoc..

[33]  Denise M. Dudzinski,et al.  The disclosure dilemma--large-scale adverse events. , 2010, The New England journal of medicine.

[34]  D. McInnes,et al.  General practitioners’ use of computers for prescribing and electronic health records: results from a national survey , 2006, The Medical journal of Australia.

[35]  W B Runciman,et al.  Iatrogenic Harm and Anaesthesia in Australia , 2005, Anaesthesia and intensive care.

[36]  H Britt,et al.  Collecting data on potentially harmful events: a method for monitoring incidents in general practice. , 1997, Family practice.

[37]  D. Chou Health IT and Patient Safety: Building Safer Systems for Better Care , 2012 .

[38]  Ben-Tzion Karsh,et al.  Information Chaos in Primary Care: Implications for Physician Performance and Patient Safety , 2011, The Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine.

[39]  J. R. Landis,et al.  The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. , 1977, Biometrics.

[40]  Farah Magrabi,et al.  Syndromic surveillance for health information system failures: a feasibility study , 2013, J. Am. Medical Informatics Assoc..

[41]  F M Farrar,et al.  ROYAL AUSTRALIAN COLLEGE OF GENERAL PRACTITIONERS , 1973, Canadian family physician Medecin de famille canadien.