Electronic medical record implementation in a large healthcare system from a leadership perspective.

BACKGROUND: Information on the use of change management models to guide electronic medical records (EMR) implementation is limited. This case study describes the leadership aspects of a large-scale EMR implementation using Kotter's change management model. METHODS: This case study presents the experience in implementing a new EMR system from the leadership perspective at King Abdulaziz Medical City, a large tertiary care hospital in Riyadh, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. We described the process of implementation and outlined the challenges and opportunities, throughout the journey from the pre-implementation to the post-implementation phases. RESULTS: We described the corresponding actions to the eight domains of Kotter's change management model: creating a sense of urgency, building the guiding team, developing a change vision and strategy, understanding and buy-in, removing obstacles, creating short-term wins, building on the change and anchoring the changes in corporate culture. CONCLUSIONS: The case study highlights that EMR implementation is not a pure information technology project but rather is a technical-based complex social adaptive project that requires a specific set of leadership competencies that are central to its success. It demonstrates that change management models might be useful for large-scale EMR implementation.

Perceptions of postoutbreak management by management and healthcare workers of a Middle East respiratory syndrome outbreak in a tertiary care hospital: a qualitative study.

OBJECTIVES: This study examines perceptions of the operational and organisational management of a major outbreak of Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS) caused by a novel coronavirus (MERS-CoV) in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA). Perspectives were sought from key decision-makers and clinical staff about the factors perceived to promote and inhibit effective and rapid control of the outbreak. SETTING: A large teaching tertiary healthcare centre in KSA; the outbreak lasted 6 weeks from June 2015. PARTICIPANTS: Data were collected via individual and focus group interviews with 28 key informant participants (9 management decision-makers and 19 frontline healthcare workers). DESIGN: We used qualitative methods of process evaluation to examine perceptions of the outbreak and the factors contributing to, or detracting from successful management. Data were analysed using qualitative thematic content analysis. RESULTS: Five themes and 15 subthemes were found. The themes were related to: (1) the high stress of the outbreak, (2) factors perceived to contribute to outbreak occurrence, (3) factors perceived to contribute to success of outbreak control, (4) factors inhibiting outbreak control and (5) long-term institutional gains in response to the outbreak management. CONCLUSION: Management of the MERS-CoV outbreak at King Abdulaziz Medical City-Riyadh was widely recognised by staff as a serious outbreak of local and national significance. While the outbreak was controlled successfully in 6 weeks, progress in management was inhibited by a lack of institutional readiness to implement infection control (IC) measures and reduce patient flow, low staff morale and high anxiety. Effective management was promoted by greater involvement of all staff in sharing learning and knowledge of the outbreak, developing trust and teamwork and harnessing collective leadership. Future major IC crises could be improved via measures to strengthen these areas, better coordination of media management and proactive staff counselling and support.

Impact of an intensivist-led multidisciplinary extended rapid response team on hospital-wide cardiopulmonary arrests and mortality.

OBJECTIVE: The effectiveness of rapid response teams remains controversial. However, many studied rapid response teams were not intensivist-led, had limited involvement beyond the initial activations, and did not provide post-ICU follow-up. The objective of this study was to examine the impact of implementing an intensivist-led multidisciplinary extended rapid response team on hospital-wide cardiopulmonary arrests and mortality. DESIGN: This was a pre-post rapid response team implementation study. SETTING: : Tertiary care academic center in Saudi Arabia. PATIENTS: A total of 98,391 patients in the 2-yr pre-rapid response team and 157,804 patients in the 3-yr post-rapid response team implementation were evaluated. INTERVENTION: The rapid response team was activated by any health care provider based on pre-defined criteria and a four-member intensivist-led multidisciplinary rapid response team responded to provide the necessary management and disposition. The rapid response team function was extended to provide follow-up until clinical stabilization. In addition, the rapid response team provided a mandatory post-ICU follow-up for a minimum of 48 hrs. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The primary outcomes were cardiopulmonary arrests and mortality. After rapid response team implementation, non-ICU cardiopulmonary arrests decreased from 1.4 to 0.9 per 1,000 hospital admissions (relative risk, 0.68; 95% confidence interval, 0.53-0.86; p = 0.001) and total hospital mortality decreased from 22.5 to 20.2 per 1,000 hospital admissions (relative risk, 0.90; 95% confidence interval, 0.85-0.95; p < 0.0001). For patients who required admission to the ICU, there was a significant reduction in the Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II scores after rapid response team implementation from 29.3 ± 9.3 to 26.9 ± 8.5 (p < 0.0001), with reduction in hospital mortality from 57.4% to 48.7% (relative risk, 0.85; 95% confidence interval, 0.78-0.92; p < 0.0001). Do-not-resuscitate orders for ward referrals increased from 0.7 to 1.7 per 1,000 hospital admissions (relative risk, 2.58; 95% confidence interval, 1.95-3.42; p < 0.0001) and decreased for patients admitted to ICU from the wards from 30.5% to 26.1% (relative risk, 0.86; 95% confidence interval, 0.74-0.99; p = 0.03). Additionally, ICU readmission rate decreased from 18.6 to 14.3 per 100 ICU alive discharges (relative risk, 0.77; 95% confidence interval, 0.66-0.89; p < 0.0001) and post-ICU hospital mortality from 18.2% to 14.8% (relative risk, 0.85; 95% confidence interval, 0.72-0.99; p = 0.04). CONCLUSION: The implementation of rapid response team was effective in reducing cardiopulmonary arrests and total hospital mortality for ward patients, improving the outcomes of patients who needed ICU admission and reduced readmissions and mortality of patients who were discharged from the ICU.