Differential effects of electronic patient record systems for wound care on hospital-acquired pressure injuries: Findings from a secondary analysis of German hospital data.

INTRODUCTION: Despite the improvements made in recent decades, the OECD regards hospital-acquired pressure injuries (HAPI) as high priority areas for actions to ensure patient safety. This study was aimed at investigating the degree of utilization of two types of electronic patient record systems for wound care on lowering HAPI rates. Furthermore, the effect of user satisfaction with the systems and perceived alignment with clinical processes should be studied. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A regression analysis of post-stratified data from German hospitals obtained from the Hospital Quality Reports (observed/expected HAPI ratio) and the IT Report Healthcare was performed. The sample comprised 319 hospitals reporting on digital wound record systems and 199 hospitals on digital nursing record systems for system utilization and the subset of hospitals using a digital system for user satisfaction and process alignment. RESULTS: The study revealed a significant effect of hospital ownership for both types of systems and a significant interaction of ownership and system utilization for digital wound record systems: Only the for-profit hospitals benefited from a higher degree of system utilization with a lower HAPI ratio. In contrast, non-profit hospitals yielded a reversed pattern, with increasing HAPI rates matching an increased system utilization. User satisfaction (significant) and the perceived alignment of the clinical process (trend) of the digital nursing record system were related with lower HAPI ratios. DISCUSSION: These findings point to a differential effect of system utilization on HAPI ratios depending on hospital ownership, and they demonstrate that those users who are satisfied with the system can act as catalysts for better care. The explained variance was small but comparable to other studies. Furthermore, it shows that explaining quality care is a complex undertaking. Sheer utilization has no effect while a differential perspective on the facilitators and barriers might help to explain the patient outcomes.

Lessons Learned from an Interprofessional European Summer School in Health Informatics.

The aim of this European interprofessional Health Informatics (HI) Summer School was (i) to make advanced healthcare students familiar with what HI can offer in terms of knowledge development for patient care and (ii) to give them an idea about the underlying technical and legal mechanisms. According to the students' evaluation, interprofessional education was very well received, problem-based learning focussing on cases was rated positively and the learning goals were met. However, it was criticised that the online material provided was rather detailed and comprehensive and could have been a bit overcharging for beginners. These drawbacks were obviously compensated by the positive experience of working in international and interprofessional groups and a generally welcoming environment.

Clinical Information Systems - Seen through the Ethics Lens.

OBJECTIVE: The more people there are who use clinical information systems (CIS) beyond their traditional intramural confines, the more promising the benefits are, and the more daunting the risks will be. This review thus explores the areas of ethical debates prompted by CIS conceptualized as smart systems reaching out to patients and citizens. Furthermore, it investigates the ethical competencies and education needed to use these systems appropriately. METHODS: A literature review covering ethics topics in combination with clinical and health information systems, clinical decision support, health information exchange, and various mobile devices and media was performed searching the MEDLINE database for articles from 2016 to 2019 with a focus on 2018 and 2019. A second search combined these keywords with education. RESULTS: By far, most of the discourses were dominated by privacy, confidentiality, and informed consent issues. Intertwined with confidentiality and clear boundaries, the provider-patient relationship has gained much attention. The opacity of algorithms and the lack of explicability of the results pose a further challenge. The necessity of sociotechnical ethics education was underpinned in many studies including advocating education for providers and patients alike. However, only a few publications expanded on ethical competencies. In the publications found, empirical research designs were employed to capture the stakeholders' attitudes, but not to evaluate specific implementations. CONCLUSION: Despite the broad discourses, ethical values have not yet found their firm place in empirically rigorous health technology evaluation studies. Similarly, sociotechnical ethics competencies obviously need detailed specifications. These two gaps set the stage for further research at the junction of clinical information systems and ethics.

Quality Requirements for Electronic Health Record Systems*. A Japanese-German Information Management Perspective.

BACKGROUND: For more than 30 years, there has been close cooperation between Japanese and German scientists with regard to information systems in health care. Collaboration has been formalized by an agreement between the respective scientific associations. Following this agreement, two joint workshops took place to explore the similarities and differences of electronic health record systems (EHRS) against the background of the two national healthcare systems that share many commonalities. OBJECTIVES: To establish a framework and requirements for the quality of EHRS that may also serve as a basis for comparing different EHRS. METHODS: Donabedian's three dimensions of quality of medical care were adapted to the outcome, process, and structural quality of EHRS and their management. These quality dimensions were proposed before the first workshop of EHRS experts and enriched during the discussions. RESULTS: The Quality Requirements Framework of EHRS (QRF-EHRS) was defined and complemented by requirements for high quality EHRS. The framework integrates three quality dimensions (outcome, process, and structural quality), three layers of information systems (processes and data, applications, and physical tools) and three dimensions of information management (strategic, tactical, and operational information management). CONCLUSIONS: Describing and comparing the quality of EHRS is in fact a multidimensional problem as given by the QRF-EHRS framework. This framework will be utilized to compare Japanese and German EHRS, notably those that were presented at the second workshop.