scholarly journals PMD38 META ANALYSIS OF THE IMPACT OF HEALTH INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY ON MEDICATION SAFETY IN HOSPITALS: AN INTERRUPTED TIME SERIES STUDY

2011 ◽  
Vol 14 (3) ◽  
pp. A85
Author(s):  
J. Chang ◽  
I. Patel ◽  
B. Kim ◽  
I. Kwon ◽  
R. Balkrishnan
Addiction ◽  
2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mark Robinson ◽  
Daniel Mackay ◽  
Lucie Giles ◽  
Jim Lewsey ◽  
Elizabeth Richardson ◽  
...  

2016 ◽  
Vol 25 (01) ◽  
pp. 13-29 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. Abraham ◽  
L. L. Novak ◽  
T. L. Reynolds ◽  
A. Gettinger ◽  
K. Zheng

SummaryObjective: To summarize recent research on unintended consequences associated with implementation and use of health information technology (health IT). Included in the review are original empirical investigations published in English between 2014 and 2015 that reported unintended effects introduced by adoption of digital interventions. Our analysis focuses on the trends of this steam of research, areas in which unintended consequences have continued to be reported, and common themes that emerge from the findings of these studies.Method: Most of the papers reviewed were retrieved by searching three literature databases: MEDLINE, Embase, and CINAHL. Two rounds of searches were performed: the first round used more restrictive search terms specific to unintended consequences; the second round lifted the restrictions to include more generic health IT evaluation studies. Each paper was independently screened by at least two authors; differences were resolved through consensus development.Results: The literature search identified 1,538 papers that were potentially relevant; 34 were deemed meeting our inclusion criteria after screening. Studies described in these 34 papers took place in a wide variety of care areas from emergency departments to ophthalmology clinics. Some papers reflected several previously unreported unintended consequences, such as staff attrition and patients’ withholding of information due to privacy and security concerns. A majority of these studies (71%) were quantitative investigations based on analysis of objectively recorded data. Several of them employed longitudinal or time series designs to distinguish between unintended consequences that had only transient impact, versus those that had persisting impact. Most of these unintended consequences resulted in adverse outcomes, even though instances of beneficial impact were also noted. While care areas covered were heterogeneous, over half of the studies were conducted at academic medical centers or teaching hospitals. Conclusion: Recent studies published in the past two years represent significant advancement of unintended consequences research by seeking to include more types of health IT applications and to quantify the impact using objectively recorded data and longitudinal or time series designs. However, more mixed-methods studies are needed to develop deeper insights into the observed unintended adverse outcomes, including their root causes and remedies. We also encourage future research to go beyond the paradigm of simply describing unintended consequences, and to develop and test solutions that can prevent or minimize their impact.


PLoS ONE ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 13 (12) ◽  
pp. e0209043 ◽  
Author(s):  
Khic-Houy Prang ◽  
Rachel Canaway ◽  
Marie Bismark ◽  
David Dunt ◽  
Margaret Kelaher

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Clemens Scott Kruse ◽  
Amanda Beane

BACKGROUND Health information technology (HIT) has been introduced into the health care industry since the 1960s when mainframes assisted with financial transactions, but questions remained about HIT’s contribution to medical outcomes. Several systematic reviews since the 1990s have focused on this relationship. This review updates the literature. OBJECTIVE The purpose of this review was to analyze the current literature for the impact of HIT on medical outcomes. We hypothesized that there is a positive association between the adoption of HIT and medical outcomes. METHODS We queried the Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) and Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online (MEDLINE) by PubMed databases for peer-reviewed publications in the last 5 years that defined an HIT intervention and an effect on medical outcomes in terms of efficiency or effectiveness. We structured the review from the Primary Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA), and we conducted the review in accordance with the Assessment for Multiple Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR). RESULTS We narrowed our search from 3636 papers to 37 for final analysis. At least one improved medical outcome as a result of HIT adoption was identified in 81% (25/37) of research studies that met inclusion criteria, thus strongly supporting our hypothesis. No statistical difference in outcomes was identified as a result of HIT in 19% of included studies. Twelve categories of HIT and three categories of outcomes occurred 38 and 65 times, respectively. CONCLUSIONS A strong majority of the literature shows positive effects of HIT on the effectiveness of medical outcomes, which positively supports efforts that prepare for stage 3 of meaningful use. This aligns with previous reviews in other time frames.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document