Publisher Correction: Science diplomacy for plant health.

An amendment to this paper has been published and can be accessed via a link at the top of the paper.

Lessons learned from implementing service-oriented clinical decision support at four sites: A qualitative study.

OBJECTIVE: To identify challenges, lessons learned and best practices for service-oriented clinical decision support, based on the results of the Clinical Decision Support Consortium, a multi-site study which developed, implemented and evaluated clinical decision support services in a diverse range of electronic health records. METHODS: Ethnographic investigation using the rapid assessment process, a procedure for agile qualitative data collection and analysis, including clinical observation, system demonstrations and analysis and 91 interviews. RESULTS: We identified challenges and lessons learned in eight dimensions: (1) hardware and software computing infrastructure, (2) clinical content, (3) human-computer interface, (4) people, (5) workflow and communication, (6) internal organizational policies, procedures, environment and culture, (7) external rules, regulations, and pressures and (8) system measurement and monitoring. Key challenges included performance issues (particularly related to data retrieval), differences in terminologies used across sites, workflow variability and the need for a legal framework. DISCUSSION: Based on the challenges and lessons learned, we identified eight best practices for developers and implementers of service-oriented clinical decision support: (1) optimize performance, or make asynchronous calls, (2) be liberal in what you accept (particularly for terminology), (3) foster clinical transparency, (4) develop a legal framework, (5) support a flexible front-end, (6) dedicate human resources, (7) support peer-to-peer communication, (8) improve standards. CONCLUSION: The Clinical Decision Support Consortium successfully developed a clinical decision support service and implemented it in four different electronic health records and four diverse clinical sites; however, the process was arduous. The lessons identified by the Consortium may be useful for other developers and implementers of clinical decision support services.

Governance for clinical decision support: case studies and recommended practices from leading institutions.

OBJECTIVE: Clinical decision support (CDS) is a powerful tool for improving healthcare quality and ensuring patient safety; however, effective implementation of CDS requires effective clinical and technical governance structures. The authors sought to determine the range and variety of these governance structures and identify a set of recommended practices through observational study. DESIGN: Three site visits were conducted at institutions across the USA to learn about CDS capabilities and processes from clinical, technical, and organizational perspectives. Based on the results of these visits, written questionnaires were sent to the three institutions visited and two additional sites. Together, these five organizations encompass a variety of academic and community hospitals as well as small and large ambulatory practices. These organizations use both commercially available and internally developed clinical information systems. MEASUREMENTS: Characteristics of clinical information systems and CDS systems used at each site as well as governance structures and content management approaches were identified through extensive field interviews and follow-up surveys. RESULTS: Six recommended practices were identified in the area of governance, and four were identified in the area of content management. Key similarities and differences between the organizations studied were also highlighted. CONCLUSION: Each of the five sites studied contributed to the recommended practices presented in this paper for CDS governance. Since these strategies appear to be useful at a diverse range of institutions, they should be considered by any future implementers of decision support.