Views of healthcare professionals to linkage of routinely collected healthcare data: A systematic literature review

Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association

Volumn 21, Issue E2, 2014, Pages

  Hopf, Yvonne Marina ^a   Bond, C ^a   Francis, J ^b   Haughney, J ^a   Helms, P J ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ABERDEEN   (United Kingdom)

^b CITY UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CINAHL; COMPUTERIZED PROVIDER ORDER ENTRY; COST; DRUG SURVEILLANCE PROGRAM; ELECTRONIC PRESCRIBING; EMBASE; FEEDBACK SYSTEM; FOLLOW UP; HEALTH CARE COST; HEALTH CARE PERSONNEL; INFORMATION PROCESSING; LANGUAGE; MANDATORY REPORTING; MEDLINE; PATIENT SAFETY; PHARMACIST; PHYSICIAN; PSYCINFO; QUALITY CONTROL; RELIABILITY; REVIEW; SECONDARY HEALTH CARE; WORKLOAD;

DATA LINKAGE; PHARMACOVIGILANCE; ROUTINE DATA;

ATTITUDE OF HEALTH PERSONNEL; DRUG-RELATED SIDE EFFECTS AND ADVERSE REACTIONS; ELECTRONIC HEALTH RECORDS; HEALTH PERSONNEL; HUMANS; INFORMATION DISSEMINATION; MEDICAL RECORD LINKAGE;

EID: 84893561717     PISSN: 10675027     EISSN: 1527974X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1136/amiajnl-2012-001575     Document Type: Review

References (43)

1. World Health Organization. The importance of pharmacovigilance. Geneva: World Health Organization, 2002.
2. Avery AJ, Anderson C, Bond CM, et al. Evaluation of patient reporting of adverse drug reactions to the UK 'Yellow Card Scheme': literature review, descriptive and qualitative analyses, and questionnaire surveys. Health Technol Assess 2011;15:1-234.
3. BMA Board of Science. Reporting adverse drug reactions-a guide for healthcare professionals. London: British Medical Association, 2006.
4. Blenkinsopp A, Wilkie P, Wang M, et al. Patient reporting of suspected adverse drug reactions: a review of published literature and international experience. Br J Clin Pharmacol 2007;63:148-56.
5. Joint Formulary Committee 2012. British National Formulary. 63rd edn. London: British Medical Association and Royal Pharmaceutical Society of Great Britain, 2012.
6. Paediatric Formulary Committee 2011. British National Formulary for Children 2011-2012. London: British Medical Association, the Royal Pharmaceutical Society of Great Britain, the Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health, and the Neonatal and Paediatric Pharmacists Group, 2011.
7. Clarkson A, Choonara I. Surveillance for fatal suspected adverse drug reactions in the UK. Arch Dis Child 2002;87:462-6.
8. Luo X, Cappelleri JC, Frush K. A systematic review on the application of pharmaco-epidemiology in assessing prescription drug-related adverse events in pediatrics. Curr Med Res Opin 2007;23:1015-24.
9. Neonatal and Paediatric Pharmacists Group. Introduction to paediatric pharmaceutical care. 1st edn. Glasgow: NHS Education for Scotland, 2005.
10. Neubert A, Sturkenboom M, Murray ML, et al. Databases for paediatric medicine research in Europe-assessment and critical appraisal. Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf 2008;17:1155-67.
11. Choonara I, Conroy S. Unlicensed and off-label drug use in children: implications for safety. Drug Saf 2002;25:1-5.
12. Glover GR. A comprehensive clinical database for mental health care in England. Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol 2000;35:523.
13. Naina Mohamed I, Helms PJ, Simpson CR, et al. Using primary care prescribing databases for pharmacovigilance. Br J Clin Pharmacol 2011;71:244-9.
14. Aylin P, Bottle A, Majeed A. Use of administrative data or clinical databases as predictors of risk of death in hospital: comparison of models. Br Med J 2007;334:1044.
15. Wettermark B, Hammar N, Fored Cm, et al. The new Swedish Prescribed Drug Register-Opportunities for pharmacoepidemiological research and experience from the first six months. Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf 2007;16:726-35.
16. Crombie IK, Brown SV, Hamley JG. Postmarketing drug surveillance by record linkage in Tayside. J Epidemiol Community Health 1984;38:226-31.
17. Helms PJ, Ekins Daukes S, Taylor MW, et al. Utility of routinely acquired primary care data for paediatric disease epidemiology and pharmacoepidemiology. Br J Clin Pharmacol 2005;59:684-90.
18. Evans JMM, McNaughton D, Donnan PT, et al. Pharmacoepidemiological research at the Medicines Monitoring Unit, Scotland: data protection and confidentiality. Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf 2001;10:669-73.
19. Black N. Secondary use of personal data for health and health services research: why identifiable data are essential. J Health Serv Res Policy 2003;8 (suppl_1):36-40.
20. Lowrance W. Learning from experience: privacy and the secondary use of data in health research. J Health Serv Res Policy 2003;8(suppl 1):2-7.
21. Oostenbrink R, Moons KGM, Bleeker SE, et al. Diagnostic research on routine care data: prospects and problems. J Clin Epidemiol 2003;56:501-6.
22. Jansen ACM, van Aalst-Cohen ES, Hutten BA, et al. Guidelines were developed for data collection from medical records for use in retrospective analyses. J Clin Epidemiol 2005;58:269-74.
23. Wellcome Trust. Towards Consensus for Best Practice: Use of patient records from general practice for research. London: Wellcome Trust, 2009.
24. Evans J, MacDonald TM. Record-linkage for pharmacovigilance in Scotland. Br J Clin Pharmacol 1999;47:105-10.
25. Moher D, Liberati A, Tezlaff J, et al. and for the PRISMA Group. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. Br Med J 2009;339:b2535.
26. Earnest MA, Ross SE, Wittevrongel L, et al. Use of a patient-accessible electronic medical record in a practice for congestive heart failure: patient and physician experiences. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2004;11:410-17.
27. Grossman JM, Bodenheimer TS, McKenzie K. Hospital-physician portals: the role of competition in driving clinical data exchange. Health Aff (Millwood) 2006;25:1629-36.
28. Shapiro JS, Kannry J, Kushniruk AW, et al. Emergency physicians' perceptions of health information exchange. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2007;14:700-5.
29. Rudin RS, Simon SR, Volk LA, et al. Understanding the decisions and values of stakeholders in health information exchanges: experiences from Massachusetts. Am J Public Health 2009;99:950-5.
30. Chisolm DJ, Purnell TS, Cohen DM, et al. Clinician perceptions of an electronic medical record during the first year of implementation in emergency services. Pediatr Emerg Care 2010;26:107-10.
31. Fontaine P, Zink T, Boyle RG, et al. Health information exchange: participation by Minnesota Primary Care Practices. Arch Intern Med 2010;170:622-9.
32. Wright A, Soran C, Jenter CA, et al. Physician attitudes toward health information exchange: results of a statewide survey. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2010;17:66-70.
33. El Emam K, Mercer J, Moreau K, et al. Physician privacy concerns when disclosing patient data for public health purposes during a pandemic influenza outbreak. BMC Public Health 2011;11:454.
34. Patel V, Abramson EL, Edwards A, et al. Physicians' potential use and preferences related to health information exchange. Int J Med Inf 2011;80:171-80.
35. Sellors C, Sellors J, Levine M, et al. Computer networking to enhance pharmacist-physician communication: a pilot demonstration project in community settings. Can Pharm J 2004;137:26-30.
36. Paré G, Sicotte C, Jacques H. The effects of creating psychological ownership on physicians' acceptance of clinical information systems. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2006;13:197-205.
37. Paré G, Sicotte C, Jaana M, et al. Prioritizing the risk factors influencing the success of clinical information system projects: a Delphi study in Canada. Methods Inf Med 2008;47:251-9.
38. AbdelMalik P, Boulos MNK, Jones R. The perceived impact of location privacy: a web-based survey of public health perspectives and requirements in the UK and Canada. BMC Public Health 2008;8:156.
39. Heidebrecht CL, Foisy J, Pereira JA, et al. Perceptions of immunization information systems for collecting pandemic H1N1 immunization data within Canada's public health community: a qualitative study. BMC Public Health 2010;10:523.
40. Porteous T, Bond C, Robertson R, et al. Electronic transfer of prescription-related information: comparing views of patients, general practitioners, and pharmacists. Br J Gen Pract 2003;53:204-9.
41. Boonstra A, Boddy D, Fischbacher M. The limited acceptance of an electronic prescription system by general practitioners: reasons and practical implications. New Tech Work Employ 2004;19:128-44.
42. Boonstra A, Boddy D, Bell S. Stakeholder management in IOS projects: analysis of an attempt to implement an electronic patient file. Eur J Inform Syst 2008;17:100-11.
43. Jaatinen P, Aarnio P, Asikainen P. The foundations for a regional information system based on a reference register. J Inform Technol Healthcare 2006;4:154-64.