The IT productivity paradox in health: A stakeholder's perspective

International Journal of Medical Informatics

Volumn 80, Issue 2, 2011, Pages 102-115

  Lapointe, Liette ^a   Mignerat, Muriel ^b   Vedel, Isabelle ^a,c  

^a MCGILL UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

^b UNIVERSITY OF OTTAWA   (Canada)

^c UNIVERSITÉ DE MONTRÉAL   (Canada)

Author keywords

Health information technology; Health services evaluation; Information systems; Productivity paradox; Qualitative research; Stakeholder theory

Indexed keywords

HEALTH INFORMATIONS; HEALTH SERVICES EVALUATION; PRODUCTIVITY PARADOX; QUALITATIVE RESEARCH; STAKEHOLDER THEORY;

HEALTH; PRODUCTIVITY; RATING; RESEARCH; TECHNOLOGY;

INFORMATION SYSTEMS;

ARTICLE; DATA ANALYSIS; HEALTH CARE QUALITY; HEALTH CARE SYSTEM; INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY; MEDICAL INFORMATION SYSTEM; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PRODUCTIVITY;

HOSPITAL INFORMATION SYSTEMS; HUMANS; MEDICAL INFORMATICS; MEDICAL RECORDS SYSTEMS, COMPUTERIZED;

EID: 78751703345     PISSN: 13865056     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2010.11.004     Document Type: Article

References (90)

1. Conn J. Still taking small steps. IT spending to grow, but don't expect large increases, annual survey says. Mod. Healthc. 2008, 38(8):S1-2.
2. IDC Report. Western Europe Healthcare Sector IT Spending Forecast Update, 2007-2011. 2008 February 2008 Contract No.: #IDC04024.
3. Berner E.S. Implementation challenges for clinical and research information systems: recommendations from the 2007 Winter Symposium of the American College of Medical Informatics. J. Am. Med. Inform. Assoc. 2008, 15(3):281-282.
4. Kilbridge P.M., Classen D.C. The informatics opportunities at the intersection of patient safety and clinical informatics. J. Am. Med. Inform. Assoc. 2008, 15(4):397-407.
5. Meyer R., Degoulet P. Assessing the capital efficiency of healthcare information technologies investments: an econometric perspective. Yearb. Med. Inform. 2008, 114.
6. Bodell R., Covvey H.D., Fader C. Achieving a "Therapeutic Dose" of IT. Stud. Health Technol. Inform. 2004, 107(Pt 2):1348-1351.
7. Sidorov J. It ain't necessarily so: the electronic health record and the unlikely prospect of reducing health care costs. Health Aff. 2006, 25(4):1079-1085.
8. Øvretveit J., Scott T., Rundall T.G., Shortell S.M., Brommels M. Implementation of electronic medical records in hospitals: two case studies. Health Policy 2007, 84(2-3):181-190.
9. Committee on Quality of Health Care in A, Institute of M. Crossing the Quality Chasm: A New Health System for the 21st Century 2001, National Academy Press, Washington, DC.
10. Koppel R., Metlay J.P., Cohen A., Abaluck B., Localio A.R., Kimmel S.E., Strom B.L. Role of computerized physician order entry systems in facilitating medication errors. Am. Med. Assoc. 2005.
11. Kaushal R., Jha A.K., Franz C., Glaser J., Shetty K.D., Jaggi T., Middleton B., Kuperman G.J., Khorasani R., Tanasijevic M. Return on investment for a computerized physician order entry system. J. Am. Med. Inform. Assoc. 2006, 13(3):261-266.
12. Delpierre C.L., Cuzin J., Fillaux M., Alvarez P., Massip Lang. A systematic review of computer-based patient record systems and quality of care: more randomized clinical trials or a broader approach?. Int. J. Qual. Health Care 2004, 16(5):407-416.
13. Berger R.G., Kichak J.P. Computerized physician order entry: helpful or harmful?. J. Am. Med. Inform. Assoc. 2004, 11(2):100-103.
14. Kaushal R., Shojania K.G., Bates D.W. Effects of computerized physician order entry and clinical decision support systems on medication safety a systematic review. Arch. Intern. Med. 2003, 163(12):1409-1416.
15. Bails D., Clayton K., Roy K., Cantor M.N. Implementing online medication reconciliation at a large academic medical center. J. Comm. J. Qual. Patient Saf. 2008, 34(9):499.
16. Thouin M.F., Hoffman J.J., Ford E.W. The effect of information technology investment on firm-level performance in the health care industry. Health Care Manage. Rev. 2008, 33(1):60.
17. Kazley A.S., Ozcan Y.A. Do hospitals with electronic medical records (EMRs) provide higher quality care? An examination of three clinical conditions. Med. Care Res. Rev. 2008, 65(4):496.
18. Lester W.T., Zai A.H., Grant R.W., Chueh H.C. Designing healthcare information technology to catalyse change in clinical care. Inform. Prim. Care. 2008, 16(1):9.
19. Chaudry B., Jerome W., Shinyl W., Margaret M., Walter M., Elizabeth R., Sally C.M., Paul G.S. Systematic review: impact of health information technology on quality, efficiency, and costs of medical care. Ann. Intern. Med. 2006, 144:742-752.
20. Avison D., Young T. Time to rethink health care and ICT?. Commun ACM 2007, 50(6):69-74.
21. Kaplan B., Harris-Salamone K. Health IT Success and failure: recommendations from literature and an AMIA Workshop. J. Am. Med. Inform. Assoc. 2009, 16(3):291-299.
22. Ludwick D.A., Doucette J. Adopting electronic medical records in primary care: lessons learned from health information systems implementation experience in seven countries. Int. J. Med. Inform. 2009, 78(1):22-31.
23. Lapointe L., Rivard S. Clinical information systems: understanding and preventing their premature demise. Healthc. Q 2005, 8(2):92-100.
24. Campbell E.M., Sittig D.F., Ash J.S., Guappone K.P., Dykstra R.H. Types of unintended consequences related to computerized provider order entry. J. Am. Med. Inform. Assoc. 2006, 13(5):547-556.
25. Demchak B., Griswold W.G., Lenert L.A. Data quality for situational awareness during mass-casualty events. AMIA Annu. Symp. Proc. 2007, 176-180.
26. Nolan R., McFarlan F.W. Information technology and the board of directors. Harv. Bus. Rev. 2005, 83(10):96.
27. Brynjolfsson E. The productivity paradox of information technology: review and assessment. Commun. ACM 1993, 36(12):67-77.
28. Freeman R.E. Strategic Management: A Stakeholder Approach 1984, Pitman, Boston.
29. Skouroliakou M., Soloupis G., Gounaris A., Charitou A., Papasarantopoulos P., Markantonis S.L., Golna C., Souliotis K. Data analysis of the benefits of an electronic registry of information in a neonatal intensive care unit in Greece. Perspect. Health. Inf. Manag. 2008, 5.
30. Fairbank J., Labianca G., Steensma H., Metters R. Information processing design choices, strategy, and risk management performance. J. Manag. Inform. Syst. 2006, 23(1):293-319.
31. Donati A., Gabbanelli V., Pantanetti S., Carletti P., Principi T., Marini B., Nataloni S., Sambo G., Pelaia P. The impact of a clinical information system in an intensive care unit. J. Clin. Monit. Comput. 2008, 22(1):31-36.
32. Reckmann M., Westbrook J., Koh Y., Lo C., Day R. Does computerized provider order entry reduce prescribing errors for hospital inpatients? A systematic review. J. Am. Med. Inform. Assoc. 2009, 16(5):613-623.
33. Schedlbauer A., Prasad V., Mulvaney C., Phansalkar S., Stanton W., Bates D.W., Avery A.J. What evidence supports the use of computerized alerts and prompts to improve clinicians' prescribing behavior?. J. Am. Med. Inform. Assoc. 2009.
34. Ammenwerth E., Spötl H.P. The time needed for clinical documentation versus direct patient care. Methods Inf. Med. 2009, 48:84-91.
35. Kuperman G.J., Gibson R.F. Computer physician order entry: benefits, costs, and issues. Ann. Intern. Med. 2003, 139(1):31-39.
36. Young A.S., Chaney E., Shoai R., Bonner L., Cohen A.N., Doebbeling B., Dorr D., Goldstein M.K., Kerr E., Nichol P. Information technology to support improved care for chronic illness. J. Gen. Intern. Med. 2007, 22:425-430.
37. Garg A.X., Adhikari N.K.J., McDonald H., Rosas-Arellano M.P., Devereaux P.J., Beyene J., Sam J., Haynes R.B. Effects of computerized clinical decision support systems on practitioner performance and patient outcomes a systematic review. JAMA 2005, 293(10):1223-1238.
38. Magnusson L., Hanson E., Borg M. A literature review study of information and communication technology as a support for frail older people living at home and their family carers. Technol. Disability 2004, 16(4):223-235.
39. Horton K. The use of telecare for people with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: implications for management. J. Nurs. Manag. 2008, 16(2):173.
40. Ash J.S., Berg M., Coiera E. Some unintended consequences of information technology in health care: the nature of patient care information system-related errors. J. Am. Med. Inform. Assoc. 2004, 11(2):104-112.
41. Wang S.J., Middleton B., Prosser L.A., Bardon C.G., Spurr C.D., Carchidi P.J., Kittler A.F., Goldszer R.C., Fairchild D.G., Sussman A.J. A cost-benefit analysis of electronic medical records in primary care. Am. J. Med. 2003, 114(5):397-403.
42. Menachemi N., Brooks R.G. Reviewing the benefits and costs of electronic health records and associated patient safety technologies. J. Med. Syst. 2006, 30(3):159-168.
43. Mador R., Shaw N. The impact of a Critical Care Information System (CCIS) on time spent charting and in direct patient care by staff in the ICU: a review of the literature. Int. J. Med. Inform. 2009, 78(7):435-445.
44. Ball M.J., Weaver C., Abbott P.A. Enabling technologies promise to revitalize the role of nursing in an era of patient safety. Int. J. Med. Inform. 2003, 69(1):29-38.
45. Georgiou A., Westbrook J. Clinician reports of the impact of electronic ordering on an emergency department. Stud. Health. Technol. Inform. 2009, 150:678-682.
46. Impact of a Critical Care Clinical Information System on Interruption Rates During Intensive Care Nurse and Physician Documentation Tasks 2010, 160. Medinfo, pp. 274-278.
47. Prgomet M., Georgiou A., Westbrook J. The impact of mobile handheld technology on hospital physicians' work practices and patient care: a systematic review. J. Am. Med. Inform. Assoc. 2009, 16(6):792-801.
48. Hebert M.A. Impact of IT on health care professionals: changes in work and the productivity paradox. Health Serv. Manage. Res. 1998, 11(2):69.
49. Nagykaldi Z., Mold J.W. The Role of Health Information Technology in the Translation of Research into Practice: an Oklahoma Physicians Resource/Research Network (OKPRN) Study. J. Am. Board Fam. Med. 2007, 20(2):188.
50. Scott J.T., Rundall T.G., Vogt T.M., Hsu J. Kaiser Permanente's experience of implementing an electronic medical record: a qualitative study. Br. Med. J. 2005, 331(7528):1313-1316.
51. Brynjolfsson E., Hitt L.M. Beyond the productivity paradox. Commun. ACM 1998, 41(8):49-55.
52. Attwell P. Technology and the productivity paradox. Organizational linkages: understanding the productivity paradox. 2003, National Academy Press, Washington. D.H. Harris (Ed.).
53. Dewan S., Kraemer K.L. International dimensions of the productivity paradox. Commun. ACM 1998, 41(8):56-62.
54. Carr N. It doesn't matter. Harv. Bus. Rev. May 2003, 81(5).
55. Thatcher M.E., Pingry D.E. Modeling the IT value paradox. Commun. ACM 2007, 50(8):41-45.
56. Frisse M.E. Comments on Return on Investment (ROI) as it applies to clinical systems. J. Am. Med. Inform. Assoc. 2006, 13(3):365-367.
57. McNutt R.A., Abrams R., Aron D.C. Patient safety efforts should focus on medical errors. Am. Med. Assoc. 2002.
58. Rothschild J.M., Fang E., Liu V., Litvak I., Yoon C., Bates D.W. Use and perceived benefits of handheld computer-based clinical references. J. Am. Med. Inform. Assoc. 2006, 13(6):619-626.
59. Lindenauer P.K., Ling D., Pekow P.S., Crawford A., Naglieri-Prescod D., Hoople N., Fitzgerald J., Benjamin E.M. Physician characteristics, attitudes, and use of computerized order entry. J. Hosp. Med. 2006, 1(4).
60. Harteloh P.P.M. Quality systems in health care: a sociotechnical approach. Health Policy 2003, 64(3):391-398.
61. Kaplan B., Shaw N. Future directions in evaluation research: people, organizational, and social issues. Methods Inf. Med. 2004, 43(3):215-231.
62. Dehning B., Dow K.E., Stratopoulos T. Information technology and organizational slack. Int. J. Acc. Inf. Sys. 2004, 5(1):51-63.
63. Stratopoulos T., Dehning B. Does successful investment in information technology solve the productivity paradox?. Inform. Manage. 2000, 38(2):103-117.
64. Aspects of the stakeholder concept and their implications for information systems development. Proceedings of the Thirty-second Hawaii International Conference on Systems Sciences (HICSS-32) 1999, A. Pouloudi (Ed.).
65. Vidgen R. Stakeholders, soft systems and technology: separation and mediation in the analysis of information system requirements. Inform. Syst. J. 1997, 7(1):21-46.
66. Burke D.E., Menachemi N. Opening the black box: measuring hospital information technology capability. Health Care. Manage. Rev. 2004, 29(3):207-217.
67. Geiger G., Derman Y.D. Methodology for evaluating physician order entry (POE) implementations. J. Eval. Clin. Pract. 2003, 9(4):401.
68. Grant A., Plante I., Leblanc F. The TEAM methodology for the evaluation of information systems in biomedicine. Comput. Biol. Med. 2002, 32(3):195-207.
69. Kazanjian A., Green C.J. Beyond effectiveness: the evaluation of information systems using a comprehensive health technology assessment framework. Comput. Biol. Med. 2002, 32(3):165-177.
70. Lyons S.S., Tripp-Reimer T., Sorofman B.A., DeWitt J.E., BootsMiller B.J., Vaughn T.E., Doebbeling B.N. VA QUERI informatics paper Information technology for clinical guideline implementation: Perceptions of multidisciplinary stakeholders. J. Am. Med. Inform. Assoc. 2005, 12(1):64-71.
71. Gilmartin M.J., Freeman R.E. Business ethics and health care: a stakeholder perspective. Health Care Manage. Rev. 2002, 27(2):52.
72. Panko R.R. Is office productivity stagnant?. MIS Quart. 1991, 191-203.
73. Eisenhardt K.M. Building theories from case study research. Acad. Manage. Rev. 1989, 14(4):532-550.
74. Lapointe L., Rivard S. A triple take on information system implementation. Organ Sci. 2007, 18(1):89.
75. Lapointe L., Rivard S. A multilevel model of resistance to information technology implementation. MIS Quart. 2005, 29(3):461-491.
76. Lapointe L., Rivard S. When good systems go bad: understanding and preventing their premature demise. Healthc. Q 2005, 8(2):92-100.
77. Lapointe L., Rivard S. Learning from physicians' resistance to CIS implementation. CMAJ 2006, 174(11):1573-1584.
78. Doing Qualitative Research 1992, Sage, Newbury Park, CA. B.F. Crabtree, W.L. Miller (Eds.).
79. Patton M.Q. Qualitative Research and Evaluation Methods 2002, Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA. 3rd ed.
80. Glaser B.G., Strauss A. The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research 1967, Aldine Publishing Company, Chicago.
81. Strauss A., Corbin J. Basics of Qualitative Research: Grounded Theory Procedures and Techniques 1990, Sage, Newbury Park.
82. Miles M.B., Huberman M. Qualitative Data Analysis: An Expanded Sourcebook 1994, Sage Publications, Inc. second ed.
83. Cimino J.J., Patel V.L., Kushniruk A.W. The patient clinical information system (PatCIS): technical solutions for and experience with giving patients access to their electronic medical records. Int. J. Med. Inform. 2002, 68(1-3):113-127.
84. Morin D., Tourigny A., Pelletier D., Robichaud L., Mathieu L., Vézina A., Bonin L., Buteau M. Seniors'views on the use of electronic health records. Inform. Prim. Care. 2005, 13(2):125.
85. Ornstein S., Bearden A. Patient perspectives on computer-based medical records. J. Fam. Pract. 1994, 38(6):606-610.
86. DesRoches C.M., Campbell E.G., Rao S.R., Donelan K., Ferris T.G., Jha A., Kaushal R., Levy D.E., Rosenbaum S., Shields A.E. Electronic health records in ambulatory care-a national survey of physicians. N. Engl. J. Med. 2008, 359(1):50.
87. A qualitative analysis of academic and private physicians and administrators' perceptions of health information technology. Proceedings of the AMIA Annual Symposium 2007, 965. L. Grabenbauer, R.S. Fraser-Maginn, J.C. McClay, J.R. Windle (Eds.).
88. Stengel D., Bauwens K., Walter M., Kopfer T., Ekkernkamp A. Comparison of handheld computer-assisted and conventional paper chart documentation of medical records a randomized, controlled trial. J. Bone Joint Surg. 2004, 86(3):553-560.
89. Simon J.S., Rundall T.G., Shortell S.M. Adoption of order entry with decision support for chronic care by physician organizations. J. Am. Med. Inform. Assoc. 2007, 14(4):432-439.
90. Glaser J., Stone J. Effective use of business intelligence. Healthc. Financ. Manage. 2008, 62(2):68.