Frameworks for Evaluating the Impact of Safety Technology Use.

IF 2.3 Q3 MEDICAL INFORMATICS
Insook Cho
{"title":"Frameworks for Evaluating the Impact of Safety Technology Use.","authors":"Insook Cho","doi":"10.4258/hir.2023.29.2.89","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"clared “If it’s not safe, it’s not care,” highlighting the crucial role of patient safety in healthcare. The Global Patient Safety Action Plan 2021–2030 of the World Health Organization (WHO) underscores the need for national policies and strategies for patient safety, surveillance, and learning systems for safety incidents, and improved healthcare practices, technologies, and medication use [1]. Recent technological advancements provide new opportunities for improving patient safety by standardizing and streamlining clinical workflows and reducing errors and costs by digitizing healthcare processes [2-4]. However, poorly designed or implemented technological approaches can instead actually increase the burden on clinicians, with alert fatigue and failure to respond to notifications by overworked clinicians leading to more medical errors [5-7]. Various frameworks, models, and methods have been developed to guide how to understand, design, and implement technology, and find a balance between the benefits and successful adoption by clinicians. This review evaluated the frameworks and models used to evaluate the impact of safety technology use and adoption through change management in acute care settings. Multiple theoretical and conceptual models have been introduced and used in health informatics to understand and explore the relationship between clinicians and technology and also to evaluate and assure the impact and successful adoption of technology in practice. We identified several frameworks that were hybrid constructs of the technology acceptance model (TAM), theory of planned behavior and intrinsic motivation, hybrid theory of diffusion of innovation, sociotechnology analysis, organization theory, and health-organization-technology (HOT)-fit model. These frameworks are based on various theories such as those of planned behavior, reasoned action, sociotechnology, longitudinal acceptance, diffusion of innovation, organization, Bandura’s social learning, and intrinsic motivation. Focusing on the frameworks and models used frequently for safety technology, we reviewed and compared seven frameworks and their constructors or concepts that affected the ultimate purpose of improving patient clinical outcomes and safety. We also added an introduction on the maturity models that are getting attention in practice.","PeriodicalId":12947,"journal":{"name":"Healthcare Informatics Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/9d/bd/hir-2023-29-2-89.PMC10209723.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Healthcare Informatics Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4258/hir.2023.29.2.89","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"MEDICAL INFORMATICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

clared “If it’s not safe, it’s not care,” highlighting the crucial role of patient safety in healthcare. The Global Patient Safety Action Plan 2021–2030 of the World Health Organization (WHO) underscores the need for national policies and strategies for patient safety, surveillance, and learning systems for safety incidents, and improved healthcare practices, technologies, and medication use [1]. Recent technological advancements provide new opportunities for improving patient safety by standardizing and streamlining clinical workflows and reducing errors and costs by digitizing healthcare processes [2-4]. However, poorly designed or implemented technological approaches can instead actually increase the burden on clinicians, with alert fatigue and failure to respond to notifications by overworked clinicians leading to more medical errors [5-7]. Various frameworks, models, and methods have been developed to guide how to understand, design, and implement technology, and find a balance between the benefits and successful adoption by clinicians. This review evaluated the frameworks and models used to evaluate the impact of safety technology use and adoption through change management in acute care settings. Multiple theoretical and conceptual models have been introduced and used in health informatics to understand and explore the relationship between clinicians and technology and also to evaluate and assure the impact and successful adoption of technology in practice. We identified several frameworks that were hybrid constructs of the technology acceptance model (TAM), theory of planned behavior and intrinsic motivation, hybrid theory of diffusion of innovation, sociotechnology analysis, organization theory, and health-organization-technology (HOT)-fit model. These frameworks are based on various theories such as those of planned behavior, reasoned action, sociotechnology, longitudinal acceptance, diffusion of innovation, organization, Bandura’s social learning, and intrinsic motivation. Focusing on the frameworks and models used frequently for safety technology, we reviewed and compared seven frameworks and their constructors or concepts that affected the ultimate purpose of improving patient clinical outcomes and safety. We also added an introduction on the maturity models that are getting attention in practice.
评估安全技术使用影响的框架。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Healthcare Informatics Research
Healthcare Informatics Research MEDICAL INFORMATICS-
CiteScore
4.90
自引率
6.90%
发文量
44
文献相关原料
公司名称 产品信息 采购帮参考价格
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信