What hinders the uptake of computerized decision support systems in hospitals? A qualitative study and framework for implementation

BackgroundAdvanced Computerized Decision Support Systems (CDSSs) assist clinicians in their decision-making process, generating recommendations based on up-to-date scientific evidence. Although this technology has the potential to improve the quality of patient care, its mere provision does not guarantee uptake: even where CDSSs are available, clinicians often fail to adopt their recommendations. This study examines the barriers and facilitators to the uptake of an evidence-based CDSS as perceived by diverse health professionals in hospitals at different stages of CDSS adoption.MethodsQualitative study conducted as part of a series of randomized controlled trials of CDSSs. The sample includes two hospitals using a CDSS and two hospitals that aim to adopt a CDSS in the future. We interviewed physicians, nurses, information technology staff, and members of the boards of directors (n = 30). We used a constant comparative approach to develop a framework for guiding implementation.ResultsWe identified six clusters of experiences of, and attitudes towards CDSSs, which we label as “positions.” The six positions represent a gradient of acquisition of control over CDSSs (from low to high) and are characterized by different types of barriers to CDSS uptake. The most severe barriers (prevalent in the first positions) include clinicians’ perception that the CDSSs may reduce their professional autonomy or may be used against them in the event of medical-legal controversies. Moving towards the last positions, these barriers are substituted by technical and usability problems related to the technology interface. When all barriers are overcome, CDSSs are perceived as a working tool at the service of its users, integrating clinicians’ reasoning and fostering organizational learning.ConclusionsBarriers and facilitators to the use of CDSSs are dynamic and may exist prior to their introduction in clinical contexts; providing a static list of obstacles and facilitators, irrespective of the specific implementation phase and context, may not be sufficient or useful to facilitate uptake. Factors such as clinicians’ attitudes towards scientific evidences and guidelines, the quality of inter-disciplinary relationships, and an organizational ethos of transparency and accountability need to be considered when exploring the readiness of a hospital to adopt CDSSs.

[1]  L. Moja,et al.  Effectiveness of computerized decision support systems linked to electronic health records: a systematic review and meta-analysis. , 2014, American journal of public health.

[2]  Wanda J. Orlikowski,et al.  Technological frames: making sense of information technology in organizations , 1994, TOIS.

[3]  A. Weyman,et al.  A qualitative study of decision-making and safety in ambulance service transitions , 2014 .

[4]  Jakob Nielsen,et al.  Usability engineering , 1997, The Computer Science and Engineering Handbook.

[5]  Samuel Z Goldhaber,et al.  Computerized decision support for the cardiovascular clinician: applications for venous thromboembolism prevention and beyond. , 2009, Circulation.

[6]  M. Petticrew,et al.  Developing and evaluating complex interventions: the new Medical Research Council guidance , 2008, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[7]  Michael G. Tecce,et al.  Use of Computerized Clinical Decision Support Systems to Prevent Venous Thromboembolism in Surgical Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis , 2017, JAMA surgery.

[8]  C. Dowrick,et al.  Implementation Science Development of a Theory of Implementation and Integration: Normalization Process Theory , 2022 .

[9]  Marc Berg,et al.  The practice of medical technology. , 2003, Sociology of health & illness.

[10]  Mara Gorli,et al.  Barriers and facilitators to the uptake of computerized clinical decision support systems in specialty hospitals: protocol for a qualitative cross-sectional study , 2014, Implementation Science.

[11]  Elizabeth Murray,et al.  Understanding the implementation of complex interventions in health care: the normalization process model , 2007, BMC Health Services Research.

[12]  Detmar W. Straub,et al.  Examining Trust in Information Technology Artifacts: The Effects of System Quality and Culture , 2008, J. Manag. Inf. Syst..

[13]  E. Brink,et al.  Constructing grounded theory : A practical guide through qualitative analysis , 2006 .

[14]  R. Grol.  Successes and Failures in the Implementation of Evidence-Based Guidelines for Clinical Practice , 2001, Medical care.

[15]  Minna Kaila,et al.  What may help or hinder the implementation of computerized decision support systems (CDSSs): a focus group study with physicians. , 2008, Family practice.

[16]  Gordon B. Davis,et al.  User Acceptance of Information Technology: Toward a Unified View , 2003, MIS Q..

[17]  Emily S. Patterson,et al.  Identifying barriers to the effective use of clinical reminders: Bootstrapping multiple methods , 2005, J. Biomed. Informatics.

[18]  Pascale Carayon,et al.  Sociotechnical systems approach to healthcare quality and patient safety. , 2012, Work.

[19]  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..

[20]  Keshini Madara Marasinghe.  Computerised clinical decision support systems to improve medication safety in long-term care homes: a systematic review , 2015, BMJ Open.

[21]  J Gosbee,et al.  Human factors engineering and patient safety , 2002, Quality & safety in health care.

[22]  T Lipman,et al.  Power and influence in clinical effectiveness and evidence-based medicine. , 2000, Family practice.

[23]  J. Grimshaw,et al.  Implementing an evidence-based computerized decision support system to improve patient care in a general hospital: the CODES study protocol for a randomized controlled trial , 2015, Implementation Science.

[24]  Alessandro Liberati,et al.  A Review of Online Evidence-based Practice Point-of-Care Information Summary Providers , 2010, Journal of medical Internet research.

[25]  H. Skipton Leonard,et al.  The Wiley-Blackwell Handbook of the Psychology of Leadership, Change, and Organizational Development , 2013 .

[26]  Richard J. Holden,et al.  A theoretical model of health information technology usage behaviour with implications for patient safety , 2009, Behav. Inf. Technol..

[27]  S. Halford,et al.  Using computer decision support systems in NHS emergency and urgent care: ethnographic study using normalisation process theory , 2013, BMC Health Services Research.

[28]  V. Hasselblad,et al.  Effect of Clinical Decision-Support Systems , 2012, Annals of Internal Medicine.

[29]  Christian Kray,et al.  Development of a computerised decision aid for thrombolysis in acute stroke care , 2015, BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making.

[30]  B. Karsh.  Beyond usability: designing effective technology implementation systems to promote patient safety , 2004, Quality and Safety in Health Care.

[31]  Dirk Ramaekers,et al.  Family Physicians’ Perceptions and Use of Electronic Clinical Decision Support During the First Year of Implementation , 2012, Journal of Medical Systems.

[32]  S. Halford,et al.  The work, workforce, technology and organisational implications of the ‘111’ single point of access telephone number for urgent (non-emergency) care: a mixed-methods case study , 2014 .

[33]  D. Bates,et al.  Ten key considerations for the successful implementation and adoption of large-scale health information technology. , 2013, Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA.

[34]  F. Mair,et al.  Why is it difficult to implement e-health initiatives? A qualitative study , 2011, Implementation science : IS.

[35]  Ilkka Kunnamo,et al.  Clinical decision support must be useful, functional is not enough: a qualitative study of computer-based clinical decision support in primary care , 2012, BMC Health Services Research.

[36]  E. Wenger.  Communities of Practice: Learning, Meaning, and Identity , 1998 .

[37]  Madhukar H. Trivedi,et al.  Bmc Medical Informatics and Decision Making Barriers to Implementation of a Computerized Decision Support System for Depression: an Observational Report on Lessons Learned in "real World" Clinical Settings , 2008 .

[38]  R Brian Haynes,et al.  Computerized clinical decision support systems for primary preventive care: A decision-maker-researcher partnership systematic review of effects on process of care and patient outcomes , 2011, Implementation science : IS.

[39]  G. Guyatt,et al.  Challenges to the Practice of Evidence-Based Medicine during Residents’ Surgical Training: A Qualitative Study Using Grounded Theory , 2003, Academic medicine : journal of the Association of American Medical Colleges.

[40]  Etienne Wenger,et al.  Communities of Practice: Learning, Meaning, and Identity , 1998 .

[41]  Stephen B. Johnson,et al.  Grounding a new information technology implementation framework in behavioral science: a systematic analysis of the literature on IT use , 2003, J. Biomed. Informatics.

[42]  David E. Kieras,et al.  The GOMS family of user interface analysis techniques: comparison and contrast , 1996, TCHI.

[43]  Margaret Williamson,et al.  Review paper: Computerized clinical decision support for prescribing: provision does not guarantee uptake , 2010, J. Am. Medical Informatics Assoc..

[44]  Giuseppe Riva,et al.  Engaging users to design positive technologies for patient engagement: The perfect interaction model , 2016 .

[45]  R Brian Haynes,et al.  Features of effective computerised clinical decision support systems: meta-regression of 162 randomised trials , 2013, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[46]  Fred D. Davis,et al.  A Theoretical Extension of the Technology Acceptance Model: Four Longitudinal Field Studies , 2000, Management Science.

[47]  P. Ravaud,et al.  A clinical decision support system for prevention of venous thromboembolism: effect on physician behavior. , 2000, JAMA.

[48]  Pouyan Esmaeilzadeh,et al.  Adoption of clinical decision support systems in a developing country: Antecedents and outcomes of physician's threat to perceived professional autonomy , 2015, Int. J. Medical Informatics.

[49]  Lorenzo Bertizzolo,et al.  Implementing an evidence-based computerized decision support system linked to electronic health records to improve care for cancer patients: the ONCO-CODES study protocol for a randomized controlled trial , 2016, Implementation Science.

[50]  Dale Goodhue,et al.  Task-Technology Fit and Individual Performance , 1995, MIS Q..

[51]  T. Greenhalgh,et al.  Theorising big IT programmes in healthcare: strong structuration theory meets actor-network theory. , 2010, Social science & medicine.

[52]  A. Strauss,et al.  The Discovery of Grounded Theory , 1967 .

[53]  Gert P. Westert,et al.  Implementation of multiple-domain covering computerized decision support systems in primary care: a focus group study on perceived barriers , 2015, BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making.

[54]  P. Nilsen.  Making sense of implementation theories, models and frameworks , 2015, Implementation Science.

[55]  Marien González-Lorenzo,et al.  Providing Doctors With High-Quality Information: An Updated Evaluation of Web-Based Point-of-Care Information Summaries , 2016, Journal of medical Internet research.

[56]  Joseph P. Wherton,et al.  Studying Scale-Up and Spread as Social Practice: Theoretical Introduction and Empirical Case Study , 2017, Journal of medical Internet research.

[57]  Marc Berg,et al.  Rationalizing Medical Work: Decision-support Techniques and Medical Practices , 2022 .

[58]  Davide Nicolini.  The work to make telemedicine work: a social and articulative view. , 2006, Social science & medicine.

[59]  J. Greenberg,et al.  Organizational Justice: Yesterday, Today, and Tomorrow , 1990 .

[60]  Catherine Pope,et al.  Resisting Evidence: The Study of Evidence-Based Medicine as a Contemporary Social Movement , 2003 .

[61]  K. Weick.  Technology as equivoque: sensemaking in new technologies , 1990 .

[62]  Fred D. Davis.  Perceived Usefulness, Perceived Ease of Use, and User Acceptance of Information Technology , 1989, MIS Q..

[63]  John N Lavis,et al.  Barriers, facilitators and views about next steps to implementing supports for evidence-informed decision-making in health systems: a qualitative study , 2014, Implementation Science.