Effects of a computerized feedback intervention on safety performance by junior doctors: results from a randomized mixed method study

BackgroundThe behaviour of doctors and their responses to warnings can inform the effective design of Clinical Decision Support Systems. We used data from a University hospital electronic prescribing and laboratory reporting system with hierarchical warnings and alerts to explore junior doctors’ behaviour. The objective of this trial was to establish whether a Junior Doctor Dashboard providing feedback on prescription warning information and laboratory alerting acceptance rates was effective in changing junior doctors’ behaviour.MethodsA mixed methods approach was employed which included a parallel group randomised controlled trial, and individual and focus group interviews. Junior doctors below the specialty trainee level 3 grade were recruited and randomised to two groups. Every doctor (N = 42) in the intervention group was e-mailed a link to a personal dashboard every week for 4 months. Nineteen participated in interviews. The 44 control doctors did not receive any automated feedback. The outcome measures were the difference in responses to prescribing warnings (of two severities) and laboratory alerting (of two severities) between the months before and the months during the intervention, analysed as the difference in performance between the intervention and the control groups.ResultsNo significant differences were observed in the rates of generating prescription warnings, or in the acceptance of laboratory alarms. However, responses to laboratory alerts differed between the pre-intervention and intervention periods. For the doctors of Foundation Year 1 grade, this improvement was significantly (p = 0.002) greater in the group with access to the dashboard (53.6% ignored pre-intervention compared to 29.2% post intervention) than in the control group (47.9% ignored pre-intervention compared to 47.0% post intervention). Qualitative interview data indicated that while junior doctors were positive about the electronic prescribing functions, they were discriminating in the way they responded to other alerts and warnings given that from their perspective these were not always immediately clinically relevant or within the scope of their responsibility.ConclusionsWe have only been able to provide weak evidence that a clinical dashboard providing individualized feedback data has the potential to improve safety behaviour and only in one of several domains. The construction of metrics used in clinical dashboards must take account of actual work processes.Trial registrationISRCTN: ISRCTN72253051

[1]  L. Kohn,et al.  To Err Is Human : Building a Safer Health System , 2007 .

[2]  E. Berner,et al.  Clinical Decision Support Systems: Theory and Practice , 1998 .

[3]  K Y Liang,et al.  Longitudinal data analysis for discrete and continuous outcomes. , 1986, Biometrics.

[4]  W. Hendee To Err is Human: Building a Safer Health System , 2001 .

[5]  A. Grant,et al.  Systematic review and economic modelling of the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of non-surgical treatments for women with stress urinary incontinence. , 2010, Health technology assessment.

[6]  Ben Shneiderman,et al.  Reducing missed laboratory results: defining temporal responsibility, generating user interfaces for test process tracking, and retrospective analyses to identify problems. , 2011, AMIA ... Annual Symposium proceedings. AMIA Symposium.

[7]  J C Wyatt,et al.  Computerised decision support systems in order communication for diagnostic, screening or monitoring test ordering: systematic reviews of the effects and cost-effectiveness of systems. , 2010, Health technology assessment.

[8]  John Chuo,et al.  Personalised performance feedback reduces narcotic prescription errors in a NICU , 2012, BMJ quality & safety.

[9]  C. Aydin,et al.  Evaluating the organizational impact of healthcare information systems , 2005 .

[10]  C. Pope,et al.  Qualitative Research in Health Care , 1999 .

[11]  Silvia Mamede,et al.  The structure of reflective practice in medicine , 2004, Medical education.

[12]  Joan S. Ash,et al.  Research Paper: Types of Unintended Consequences Related to Computerized Provider Order Entry , 2006, J. Am. Medical Informatics Assoc..

[13]  Sunil Sinha,et al.  Hospital Boards and Quality Dashboards , 2006 .

[14]  Jane M. Young,et al.  Audit and feedback: effects on professional practice and healthcare outcomes. , 2012, The Cochrane database of systematic reviews.

[15]  Dean F. Sittig,et al.  Work-Sampling: A Statistical Approach to Evaluation of the Effect of Computers on Work Patterns in Healthcare , 1993, Methods of Information in Medicine.

[16]  M. Gordon,et al.  A novel system of prescribing feedback to reduce errors: A pilot study. , 2012, The International journal of risk & safety in medicine.

[17]  Christopher Flannigan,et al.  Dashboards in neonatology , 2010 .

[18]  A. Strauss,et al.  The discovery of grounded theory: strategies for qualitative research aldine de gruyter , 1968 .

[19]  David Taylor An in depth investigation into causes of prescribing errors by foundation trainees in relation to their medical education , 2007 .

[20]  Marc Berg,et al.  Drug safety alert generation and overriding in a large Dutch university medical centre , 2009, Pharmacoepidemiology and drug safety.

[21]  B. Franklin,et al.  Providing feedback to hospital doctors about prescribing errors; a pilot study , 2007, Pharmacy World & Science.

[22]  Wayne W. Eckerson Performance Dashboards: Measuring, Monitoring, and Managing Your Business , 2005 .

[23]  Monique W. M. Jaspers,et al.  Effects of clinical decision-support systems on practitioner performance and patient outcomes: a synthesis of high-quality systematic review findings , 2011, J. Am. Medical Informatics Assoc..

[24]  C. Anandan,et al.  The Impact of eHealth on the Quality and Safety of Health Care: A Systematic Overview , 2011, PLoS medicine.

[25]  ELSKE AMMENWERTH,et al.  Review Paper: The Effect of Electronic Prescribing on Medication Errors and Adverse Drug Events: A Systematic Review , 2008, J. Am. Medical Informatics Assoc..

[26]  L. Provost,et al.  Model for improvement - Part Two: Measurement and feedback for quality improvement efforts. , 2009, Pediatric clinics of North America.

[27]  B. Franklin,et al.  A quality improvement programme to increase compliance with an anti-infective prescribing policy. , 2011, The Journal of antimicrobial chemotherapy.

[28]  A. Thomas,et al.  An educational and audit tool to reduce prescribing error in intensive care , 2008, Quality & Safety in Health Care.

[29]  A. Fayaz-Bakhsh,et al.  Can an electronic prescribing system detect doctors who are more likely to make a serious prescribing error? , 2012, Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine.

[30]  Jane M. Young,et al.  Does telling people what they have been doing change what they do? A systematic review of the effects of audit and feedback , 2006, Quality and Safety in Health Care.

[31]  J Callen,et al.  The Rate of Missed Test Results in an Emergency Department , 2010, Methods of Information in Medicine.

[32]  J. Kitzinger Focus group research: using group dynamics to explore perceptions, experiences and understandings , 2005 .

[33]  J. Archer,et al.  State of the science in health professional education: effective feedback , 2010, Medical education.

[34]  Eric G. Poon,et al.  Research Paper: The Extent and Importance of Unintended Consequences Related to Computerized Provider Order Entry , 2007, J. Am. Medical Informatics Assoc..

[35]  Martin Jung,et al.  RESEARCH ARTICLE Open Access Development of a context model to prioritize drug safety alerts in CPOE systems , 2022 .

[36]  Kaveh G Shojania,et al.  Effect of point-of-care computer reminders on physician behaviour: a systematic review , 2010, Canadian Medical Association Journal.

[37]  Roger A. Clarke,et al.  Information technology and dataveillance , 1988, CACM.

[38]  B. Crabtree,et al.  The qualitative research interview , 2006, Medical education.

[39]  T. Dornan,et al.  An in-depth investigation into causes of prescribing errors by foundation trainees in relation to thier medical education: EQUIP study. , 2009 .

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