Cookies on this website

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you click 'Accept all cookies' we'll assume that you are happy to receive all cookies and you won't see this message again. If you click 'Reject all non-essential cookies' only necessary cookies providing core functionality such as security, network management, and accessibility will be enabled. Click 'Find out more' for information on how to change your cookie settings.

ContextThe Scottish Government has identified computerised decision support as a strategic priority in order to improve knowledge management in health and social care settings. A national programme to build a pilot Decision Support Platform was funded in 2015.AimsWe undertook a formative evaluation of the Decision Support Platform to inform plans for its national roll-out in primary care.MethodsWe conducted a series of in-depth semistructured interviews and non-participant observations of workshops demonstrating decision support systems. Participants were policymakers and clinical opinion leaders from primary care. As the Platform was in its early stages of development at the time of data collection, we focused on exploring expectations and drivers of the pilot decision support system tested in primary care. Our methodological approach had to be tailored to changing circumstances and offered important opportunities for realising impact through ongoing formative feedback to policymakers and active engagement of key clinical stakeholders. We drew on sociotechnical principles to inform data analysis and coded qualitative data with the help of NVivo software.FindingsWe conducted 30 interviews and non-participant ethnographic observations of eight stakeholder engagement workshops. We observed a strong sense of support from all stakeholders for the Platform and associated plans to roll it out across NHS Scotland. Strategic drivers included the potential to facilitate integration of care, preventive care, patient self-management, shared decision-making and patient engagement through the ready availability of clinically important information. However, in order to realise these benefits, participants highlighted the need for strong national eHealth leadership to drive a coherent strategy and ensure sustained funding, system usability (which stakeholders perceived to be negatively affected by alert fatigue and integration with existing systems) and ongoing monitoring of potential unintended consequences emerging from implementations (eg, increasing clinical workloads).Conclusions and implicationsIn order to address potential tensions between national leadership and local usability as well as unintended consequences, there is a need to have overall national ownership to support the implementation of the Platform. Potential local tensions could be addressed through allowing a degree of local customisation of systems and tailoring of alerts, and investing in a limited number of pilots that are carefully evaluated to mitigate emerging risks early.

Original publication

DOI

10.1136/bmjhci-2019-100022

Type

Journal article

Journal

BMJ health & care informatics

Publication Date

05/2019

Volume

26

Addresses

Usher Institute of Population Health Sciences and Informatics, The University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK kathrin.beyer@ed.ac.uk.

Keywords

Humans, Longitudinal Studies, Program Evaluation, Qualitative Research, Decision Support Systems, Clinical, Administrative Personnel, National Health Programs, Primary Health Care, Scotland, Female, Male, Interviews as Topic, Stakeholder Participation