Browsing by Author "Arbuckle, Nicole"

Now showing 1 - 6 of 6
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Development of a Workflow Integration Survey (WIS) for Implementing Computerized Clinical Decision Support
    (2011-10) Flanagan, Mindy; Arbuckle, Nicole; Saleem, Jason J.; Militello, Laura G.; Haggstrom, David A.; Doebbeling, Bradley N.
    Interventions that focus on improving computerized clinical decision support (CDS) demonstrate that successful workflow integration can increase the adoption and use of CDS. However, metrics for assessing workflow integration in clinical settings are not well established. The goal of this study was to develop and validate a survey to assess the extent to which CDS is integrated into workflow. Qualitative data on CDS design, usability, and integration from four sites was collected by direct observation, interviews, and focus groups. Thematic analysis based on the sociotechnical systems theory revealed consistent themes across sites. Themes related to workflow integration included navigation, functionality, usability, and workload. Based on these themes, a brief 12-item scale to assess workflow integration was developed, refined, and validated with providers in a simulation study. To our knowledge, this is one of the first tools developed to specifically measure workflow integration of CDS.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Examining the Relationship between Clinical Decision Support and Performance Measurement
    (2009-11) Haggstrom, David A.; Militello, Laura G.; Arbuckle, Nicole; Flanagan, Mindy; Doebbeling, Bradley N.
    In concept and practice, clinical decision support (CDS) and performance measurement represent distinct approaches to organizational change, yet these two organizational processes are interrelated. We set out to better understand how the relationship between the two is perceived, as well as how they jointly influence clinical practice. To understand the use of CDS at benchmark institutions, we conducted semistructured interviews with key managers, information technology personnel, and clinical leaders during a qualitative field study. Improved performance was frequently cited as a rationale for the use of clinical reminders. Pay-for-performance efforts also appeared to provide motivation for the use of clinical reminders. Shared performance measures were associated with shared clinical reminders. The close link between clinical reminders and performance measurement causes these tools to have many of the same implementation challenges.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Integrating Clinical Decision Support into Workflow
    (2011) Doebbeling, Bradley N.; Saleem, Jason; Haggstrom, David; Militello, Laura; Flanagan, Mindy; Arbuckle, Nicole; Kiess, Chris; Hoke, Shawn; Dexter, Paul; Linder, Jeff; Sarbah, Steedman; Burgo, Lucille
    Purpose: The aims were to (1) identify barriers and facilitators related to integration of clinical decision support (CDS) into workflow and (2) develop and test CDS design alternatives. Scope: To better understand CDS integration, we studied its use in practice, focusing on CDS for colorectal cancer (CRC) screening and followup. Phase 1 involved outpatient clinics of four different systems—120 clinic staff and providers and 118 patients were observed. In Phase 2, prototyped design enhancements to the Veterans Administration’s CRC screening reminder were compared against its current reminder in a simulation experiment. Twelve providers participated. Methods: Phase 1 was a qualitative project, using key informant interviews, direct observation, opportunistic interviews, and focus groups. All data were analyzed using a coding template, based on the sociotechnical systems theory, which was modified as coding proceeded and themes emerged. Phase 2 consisted of rapid prototyping of CDS design alternatives based on Phase 1 findings and a simulation experiment to test these design changes in a within-subject comparison. Results: Very different CDS types existed across sites, yet there are common barriers: (1) lack of coordination of “outside” results and between primary and specialty care; (2) suboptimal data organization and presentation; (3) needed provider and patient education; (4) needed interface flexibility; (5) needed technological enhancements; (6) unclear role assignments; (7) organizational issues; and (8) disconnect with quality reporting. Design enhancements positively impacted usability and workflow integration but not workload. Conclusions: Effective CDS design and integration requires: (1) organizational and workflow integration; (2) integrating outside results; (3) improving data organization and presentation in a flexible interface; and (4) providing just-in time education, cognitive support, and quality reporting.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Paper Persistence and Computer-based Workarounds with the Electronic Health Record in Primary Care
    (2011-09) Saleem, Jason J.; Flanagan, Mindy; Militello, Laura G.; Arbuckle, Nicole; Russ, Alissa L.; Burgo-Black, A. Lucile; Doebbeling, Bradley N.
    With the United States national goal and incentive program to transition from paper to electronic health records (EHRs), healthcare organizations are increasingly implementing EHRs and other related health information technology (IT). However, in institutions which have long adopted these computerized systems, such as the Veterans Health Administration, healthcare workers continue to rely on paper to complete their work. Furthermore, insufficient EHR design also results in computer-based workarounds. Using direct observation with opportunistic interviewing, we investigated the use of paper- and computer-based workarounds to the EHR with a multi-site study of 54 healthcare workers, including primary care providers, nurses, and other healthcare staff. Our analysis revealed several paper- and computer-based workarounds to the VA’s EHR. These workarounds, including clinician-designed information tools, provide evidence for how to enhance the design of the EHR to better support the needs of clinicians.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Provider Perceptions of Colorectal Cancer Screening Clinical Decision Support at Three Benchmark Institutions
    (2009-11) Saleem, Jason J.; Militello, Laura G.; Arbuckle, Nicole; Flanagan, Mindy; Haggstrom, David A.; Linder, Jeffrey A.; Doebbeling, Bradley N.
    Implementation of computerized clinical decision support (CDS), and its integration into workflow has not reached its potential. To better understand the use of CDS for colorectal cancer (CRC) screening at benchmark institutions for health information technology (HIT), we conducted direct observation, including opportunistic interviews of primary care providers, as well as key informant interviews and focus groups, to document current challenges to CRC screening and follow-up at clinics affiliated with the Veterans Heath Administration, Regenstrief Institute, and Partners HealthCare System. Analysis revealed six common barriers across institutions from the primary care providers’ perspective: receiving and documenting “outside” exam results, inaccuracy of the CDS, compliance issues, poor usability, lack of coordination between primary care and gastroenterology, and the need to attend to more urgent patient issues. Strategies should be developed to enhance current HIT to address these challenges and better support primary care providers and staff.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Redesign of a computerized clinical reminder for colorectal cancer screening: a human-computer interaction evaluation
    (2011-11) Saleem, Jason J.; Haggstrom, David A.; Militello, Laura G.; Flanagan, Mindy; Kiess, Chris L.; Arbuckle, Nicole; Doebbeling, Bradley N.
    Background Based on barriers to the use of computerized clinical decision support (CDS) learned in an earlier field study, we prototyped design enhancements to the Veterans Health Administration's (VHA's) colorectal cancer (CRC) screening clinical reminder to compare against the VHA's current CRC reminder. Methods In a controlled simulation experiment, 12 primary care providers (PCPs) used prototypes of the current and redesigned CRC screening reminder in a within-subject comparison. Quantitative measurements were based on a usability survey, workload assessment instrument, and workflow integration survey. We also collected qualitative data on both designs. Results Design enhancements to the VHA's existing CRC screening clinical reminder positively impacted aspects of usability and workflow integration but not workload. The qualitative analysis revealed broad support across participants for the design enhancements with specific suggestions for improving the reminder further. Conclusions This study demonstrates the value of a human-computer interaction evaluation in informing the redesign of information tools to foster uptake, integration into workflow, and use in clinical practice.