The Fund supports networks of state health policy decision makers to help identify, inspire, and inform policy leaders.
The Milbank Memorial Fund supports two state leadership programs for legislative and executive branch state government officials committed to improving population health.
The Fund identifies and shares policy ideas and analysis to advance state health leadership, strong primary care, and sustainable health care costs.
Keep up with news and updates from the Milbank Memorial Fund. And read the latest blogs from our thought leaders, including Fund President Christopher F. Koller.
The Fund publishes The Milbank Quarterly, as well as reports, issues briefs, and case studies on topics important to health policy leaders.
The Milbank Memorial Fund is is a foundation that works to improve population health and health equity.
September 2013 (Volume 91)
Quarterly Article
Mary Dixon-Woods
Sabi Redwood
Myles Leslie
Joel Minion
Graham P. Martin
Jamie J. Coleman
Nov 5, 2024
Oct 30, 2024
Oct 23, 2024
Back to The Milbank Quarterly
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
Read on Wiley Online Library
Volume 91, Issue 3 (pages 424–454) DOI: 10.1111/1468-0009.12021 Published in 2013