The Milbank Memorial Fund is an endowed operating foundation that publishes The Milbank Quarterly, commissions projects, and convenes state health policy decision makers on issues they identify as important to population health.
We focus on a number of topic areas identified by state health policy leaders as important to population health.
The Center for Evidence-based Policy at Oregon Health & Science University is a national leader in evidence-based decision making and policy design.
Keep up with news and updates from the Milbank Memorial Fund. Get the latest from thought leaders, including Christopher F. Koller, president of the Fund.
We publish The Milbank Quarterly, as well as reports, issues briefs, and case studies on topics important to population health.
September 2013 (Volume 91)
September 2013 | Mary Dixon-Woods, Sabi Redwood, Myles Leslie, Joel Minion, Graham P. Martin, Jamie J. Coleman | Featured Article
Context: “Meaningful use” of electronic health records to improve quality of care has remained understudied. We evaluated an approach to improving patients’ safety and quality of care involving the secondary use of data from a hospital electronic prescribing and decision support system (ePDSS).
Methods: We conducted a case study of a large English acute care hospital with a well-established ePDSS. Our study was based on ethnographic observations of clinical settings (162 hours) and meetings (28 hours), informal conversations with clinical staff, semistructured interviews with ten senior executives, and the collection of relevant documents. Our data analysis was based on the constant comparative method.
Findings: This hospital’s approach to quality and safety could be characterized as “technovigilance.” It involved treating the ePDSS as a warehouse of data on clinical activity and performance. The hospital converted the secondary data into intelligence about the performance of individuals, teams, and clinical services and used this as the basis of action for improvement. Through a combination of rapid audit, feedback to clinical teams, detailed and critical review of apparent omissions in executive-led meetings, a focus on personal professional responsibility for patients’ safety and quality care, and the correction of organizational or systems defects, technovigilance was—based on the hospital’s own evidence—highly effective in improving specific indicators. Measures such as the rate of omitted doses of medication showed marked improvement. As do most interventions, however, technovigilance also had unintended consequences. These included the risk of focusing attention on aspects of patient safety made visible by the system at the expense of other, less measurable but nonetheless important, concerns.
Conclusions: The secondary use of electronic data can be effective for improving specific indicators of care if accompanied by a range of interventions to ensure proper interpretation and appropriate action. But care is needed to avoid unintended consequences.
Author(s): Mary Dixon-Woods, Sabi Redwood, Myles Leslie, Joel Minion, Graham P. Martin, and Jamie J. Coleman
Keywords: electronic health records, meaningful use, patient safety, quality of care, ethnography, medication errors
Download the study
Read on Wiley Online Library
Volume 91, Issue 3 (pages 424–454)
Published in 2013
Commentary: The Role of “Technovigilance” in Improving Care in Hospitals
In This Issue