Implementing a ward-level intervention to improve nursing handover communication with a focus on bedside handover-A qualitative study.

AIM: To improve the effectiveness of nursing clinical handover through a qualitative, tailored communication intervention. DESIGN: A multisite before and after intervention using qualitative ethnography combined with discourse analysis of nursing handover interactions. METHODS: We implemented a tailored ward-based intervention to redesign nursing handover practice with co-constructed recommendations for organisational and cultural change on seven wards across three affiliated metropolitan hospitals between February 2020 and November 2022. The intervention was informed by pre-implementation interviews and focus groups with nursing, medical and allied health staff and patients (n = 151) and observed and/or audio-recorded handover events (n = 233). Post-intervention we conducted interviews and focus groups (n = 79) and observed and/or audio-recorded handover events (n = 129) to qualitatively evaluate impact. RESULTS: Our translational approach resulted in substantial changes post-intervention. Nurses conducted more shift-to-shift handovers at the bedside, with greater patient interaction and better structured and more comprehensive information transfer, supported by revised handover documentation. Redesigned group handovers were focused and efficient, communicating critical patient information. CONCLUSION: Contextualised training combined with changes to ward-level systemic factors impeding communication results in improved nursing handovers. Practice change requires strong executive leadership and project governance, combined with effective ward-level leadership, collaboration and mentoring. The speed and degree of change post-intervention demonstrates the power of interdisciplinary collaborative research between hospital executive, ward leadership and communication specialists. RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE: Nurses are more likely to conduct efficient group handovers and informative, patient-centred bedside handovers in line with policy when they understand the value of handover and have practical strategies to support communication. Communication training should be combined with broader ward-level changes to handover practice tailored to the ward context. A multilevel approach results in more effective practice change. REPORTING METHOD: We adhered to the COREQ guidelines. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: We interviewed patients on study wards pre and post intervention.

The Impact and Usability of the eRIC System in the ICU - A Qualitative Study.

The Intensive Care Unit (ICU) is an information-intense environment where more patient data points are recorded than in other wards. The electronic Record for Intensive Care (eRIC) is an ICU information system that integrates patient data every minute from multiple systems. Once implemented across New South Wales (NSW), eRIC will be one of the largest system-wide ICU clinical information systems in the world. This study explored experiences with the use of eRIC by ICU clinicians at an Australian metropolitan teaching hospital. Semi-structured, in-depth interviews relating to physician electronic test management processes were conducted with 11 ICU clinicians and one clinical information system manager was observed in their use of the system. The introduction of eRIC resulted in an additional patient record, which was perceived to hold implications for workflow and patient safety. Study findings are valuable for informing implementation as the rollout of eRIC continues.

Older patients and dialysis shared decision-making. Insights from an ethnographic discourse analysis of interviews and clinical interactions.

OBJECTIVE: To describe and analyse the perspectives and communication practices of kidney clinicians and older patients (aged 60 +) during collaborative education and decision-making about dialysis. METHODS: This qualitative study drew on pluralistic data sources and analytical approaches investigating elicited semi-structured interviews (n = 31) with doctors (n = 8), nurses (n = 8) and patients (n = 15), combined with ethnographic observations, written artefacts and audio-recorded naturally-occurring interactions (n = 23, education sessions n = 4; consultations n = 19) in a tertiary Australian kidney outpatient clinic. Data were analysed for themes and linguistic discourse features. RESULTS: Five themes were identified across all data sources: 1) lost opportunity in education; 2) persistent disease knowledge gaps; 3) putting up with dialysis; 4) perceived and real involvement in decision-making and 5) complex role of family as decision-making brokers. CONCLUSION: As the first study to complement interviews with evidence from naturally-occurring kidney interactions, this study balances the perspectives of how older patients and their clinicians view chronic kidney disease education, with how decision-making about dialysis is reflected in practice. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: The study provides suggestions for contextualized, multi-perspectives formal and informal training for improving decision-making about dialysis, spanning from indications to boost communication efficiency, to reducing unexplained jargon, incorporating patient navigators and exploring different dialysis modalities.

Shared decision making in chronic kidney disease: a qualitative study of the impact of communication practices on treatment decisions for older patients.

BACKGROUND: Effective interpersonal communication is critical for shared decision-making (SDM). Previous SDM communication training in nephrology has lacked context-specific evidence from ethnographic analysis of SDM interactions with older patients considering treatment options of end stage kidney disease (ESKD). This study explores communication strategies in SDM discussions in nephrology, specifically focusing on older patients considering dialysis as kidney replacement therapy (KRT). METHODS: We conducted a qualitative study analysing naturally-occurring audio-recorded clinical interactions (n = 12) between Australian kidney doctors, patients aged 60+, and carers. Linguistic ethnography and qualitative socially-oriented functional approaches were used for analysis. RESULTS: Two types of communication strategies emerged: (1) Managing and advancing treatment decisions: involving active checking of knowledge, clear explanations of options, and local issue resolution. (2) Pulling back: Deferring or delaying decisions through mixed messaging. Specifically for non-English speaking patients, pulling back was further characterised by communication challenges deferring decision-making including ineffective issue management, and reliance on family as interpreters. Age was not an explicit topic of discussion among participants when it came to making decisions about KRT but was highly relevant to treatment decision-making. Doctors appeared reluctant to broach non-dialysis conservative management, even when it appears clinically appropriate. Conservative care, an alternative to KRT suitable for older patients with co-morbidities, was only explicitly discussed when prompted by patients or carers. CONCLUSIONS: The findings highlight the impact of different communication strategies on SDM discussions in nephrology. This study calls for linguistic-informed contextualised communication training and provides foundational evidence for nephrology-specific communication skills training in SDM for KRT among older patients. There is urgent need for doctors to become confident and competent in discussing non-dialysis conservative management. Further international research should explore naturally-occurring SDM interactions in nephrology with other vulnerable groups to enhance evidence and training integration.

Readability and beyond - Health literacy and numeracy and COVID-19 communications in early childhood education: Are we communicating effectively?

OBJECTIVE: Analyse the linguistic and numerical complexity of COVID-19-related health information communicated from Australian national and state governments and health agencies to national and local early childhood education (ECE) settings. METHODS: Publicly available health information (n = 630) was collected from Australian national and state governments and health agencies, and ECE agencies and service providers. A purposive sample of documents (n = 33) from 2020 to 2021 was analysed inductively and deductively combining readability, health numeracy and linguistic analyses and focusing on the most frequent actionable health advice topics. RESULTS: COVID-19 health advice most frequently related to hygiene, distancing and exclusion. Readability scores in 79% (n = 23) of documents were above the recommended grade 6 reading level for the public. Advice was delivered using direct linguistic strategies (n = 288), indirect strategies (n = 73), and frequent mitigating hedges (n = 142). Most numerical concepts were relatively simple, but lacked elaborative features (e.g., analogies) and/or required subjective interpretation. CONCLUSION: COVID-19 health advice available to the ECE sector included linguistic and numerical information open to mis/interpretation making it difficult to understand and implement. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Combining readability scores with measures of linguistic and numerical complexity offers a more holistic approach to assessing accessibility of health advice and improving health literacy among its recipients.

Communication of Diagnostic Uncertainty in Primary Care and Its Impact on Patient Experience: an Integrative Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: Diagnostic uncertainty is a pervasive issue in primary care where patients often present with non-specific symptoms early in the disease process. Knowledge about how clinicians communicate diagnostic uncertainty to patients is crucial to prevent associated diagnostic errors. Yet, in-depth research on the interpersonal communication of diagnostic uncertainty has been limited. We conducted an integrative systematic literature review (PROSPERO CRD42020197624, unfunded) to investigate how primary care doctors communicate diagnostic uncertainty in interactions with patients and how patients experience their care in the face of uncertainty. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, PsycINFO, and Linguistics and Language Behaviour Abstracts (LLBA) from inception to December 2021 for MeSH and keywords related to 'communication', 'diagnosis', 'uncertainty' and 'primary care' environments and stakeholders (patients and doctors), and conducted additional handsearching. We included empirical primary care studies published in English on spoken communication of diagnostic uncertainty by doctors to patients. We assessed risk of bias with the QATSDD quality assessment tool and conducted thematic and content analysis to synthesise the results. RESULTS: Inclusion criteria were met for 19 out of 1281 studies. Doctors used two main communication strategies to manage diagnostic uncertainty: (1) patient-centred communication strategies (e.g. use of empathy), and (2) diagnostic reasoning strategies (e.g. excluding serious diagnoses). Linguistically, diagnostic uncertainty was either disclosed explicitly or implicitly through diverse lexical and syntactical constructions, or not communicated (omission). Patients' experiences of care in response to the diverse communicative and linguistic strategies were mixed. Patient-centred approaches were generally regarded positively by patients. DISCUSSION: Despite a small number of included studies, this is the first review to systematically catalogue the diverse communication and linguistic strategies to express diagnostic uncertainty in primary care. Health professionals should be aware of the diverse strategies used to express diagnostic uncertainty in practice and the value of combining patient-centred approaches with diagnostic reasoning strategies.

Perspectives on Support Material for Referrals to Cochlear Implantation Teams.

PURPOSE: This study used a collaborative approach to explore the needs, barriers, and facilitators to developing cochlear implant referral information material that would be valuable for hard of hearing adults and referring audiologists. METHOD: During the development of a prototype referral aid to be used within the Australian context, a multistage qualitative study was conducted using a consultative process, informal and semistructured interviews, as well as online surveys. A deductive directed content analysis approach was applied to assess respondents' perspectives. A total of 106 participants (37 hard of hearing adults and 69 audiologists) were involved across the multiple phases of this study. RESULTS: Referral practices for the evaluation of cochlear implantation candidacy in Australia are highly inconsistent, supporting the need to streamline referral information. The following facilitators were identified to support the development of referral material: appropriate content, perceived patient benefit, and objectivity. Areas for improvement related to the broadness of the content, impact on professional identity, and accessibility. CONCLUSIONS: Practical insight from patients and referrers can inform the development of patient-facing material related to cochlear implant referrals. Streamlining information used in educational material could alleviate confusion inherent to varied health literacy levels and support patients in making informed decisions related to pursuing, or not, cochlear implantation candidacy evaluation services.

Improving patient-centred care through a tailored intervention addressing nursing clinical handover communication in its organizational and cultural context.

AIMS: To increase the quality and safety of patient care, many hospitals have mandated that nursing clinical handover occur at the patient's bedside. This study aims to improve the patient-centredness of nursing handover by addressing the communication challenges of bedside handover and the organizational and cultural practices that shape handover. DESIGN: Qualitative linguistic ethnographic design combining discourse analysis of actual handover interactions and interviews and focus groups before and after a tailored intervention. METHODS: Pre-intervention we conducted interviews with nursing, medical and allied health staff (n = 14) and focus groups with nurses and students (n = 13) in one hospital's Rehabilitation ward. We recorded handovers (n = 16) and multidisciplinary team huddles (n = 3). An intervention of communication training and recommendations for organizational and cultural change was delivered to staff and championed by ward management. After the intervention we interviewed nurses and recorded and analyzed handovers. Data were collected from February to August 2020. Ward management collected hospital-acquired complication data. RESULTS: Notable changes post-intervention included a shift to involve patients in bedside handovers, improved ward-level communication and culture, and an associated decrease in reported hospital-acquired complications. CONCLUSIONS: Effective change in handover practices is achieved through communication training combined with redesign of local practices inhibiting patient-centred handovers. Strong leadership to champion change, ongoing mentoring and reinforcement of new practices, and collaboration with nurses throughout the change process were critical to success. IMPACT: Ineffective communication during handover jeopardizes patient safety and limits patient involvement. Our targeted, locally designed communication intervention significantly improved handover practices and patient involvement through the use of informational and interactional protocols, and redesigned handover tools and meetings. Our approach promoted a ward culture that prioritizes patient-centred care and patient safety. This innovative intervention resulted in an associated decrease in hospital-acquired complications. The intervention has been rolled out to a further five wards across two hospitals.

'More than words' - Interpersonal communication, cognitive bias and diagnostic errors.

During the diagnostic process, clinicians may make assumptions, prematurely judge or diagnose patients based on their appearance, their speech or how they are portrayed by other clinicians. Such judgements can be a major source of diagnostic error and are often linked to unconscious cognitive biases - faulty quick-fire thinking patterns that impact clinical reasoning. Patient safety is profoundly influenced by cognitive bias and language, i.e. how information is presented or gathered, and then synthesised by clinicians to form and communicate diagnostic decisions. Here, we discuss the intricate links between interpersonal communication, cognitive bias, and diagnostic error from a patient's, a linguist's and clinician's perspective. We propose that through patient engagement and applied health communication research, we can enhance our understanding of how the interplay of communication behaviours, biases and errors can impact upon the patient experience and diagnostic error. In doing so, we provide new avenues for collaborative diagnostic error research striving towards healthcare improvements and safer diagnosis.

Diagnostic statements: a linguistic analysis of how clinicians communicate diagnosis.

OBJECTIVES: To investigate from a linguistic perspective how clinicians deliver diagnosis to patients, and how these statements relate to diagnostic accuracy. METHODS: To identify temporal and discursive features in diagnostic statements, we analysed 16 video-recorded interactions collected during a practice high-stakes exam for internationally trained clinicians (25% female, n=4) to gain accreditation to practice in Australia. We recorded time spent on history-taking, examination, diagnosis and management. We extracted and deductively analysed types of diagnostic statements informed by literature. RESULTS: Half of the participants arrived at the correct diagnosis, while the other half misdiagnosed the patient. On average, clinicians who made a diagnostic error took 30 s less in history-taking and 30 s more in providing diagnosis than clinicians with correct diagnosis. The majority of diagnostic statements were evidentialised (describing specific observations (n=24) or alluding to diagnostic processes (n=7)), personal knowledge or judgement (n=8), generalisations (n=6) and assertions (n=4). Clinicians who misdiagnosed provided more specific observations (n=14) than those who diagnosed correctly (n=9). CONCLUSIONS: Interactions where there is a diagnostic error, had shorter history-taking periods, longer diagnostic statements and featured more evidence. Time spent on history-taking and diagnosis, and use of evidentialised diagnostic statements may be indicators for diagnostic accuracy.

Identifying the mechanisms that contribute to safe and effective electronic test result management systems- a multisite qualitative study.

OBJECTIVE: Suboptimal design of health information technology (IT) systems can lead to the introduction of errors in the diagnostic process. We aimed to identify mechanisms that can affect the safety and effectiveness of these systems in hospital settings thus contributing to the building of an explicit and replicable understanding of the variables that can affect the functioning of IT systems. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This qualitative study drew from observations and semistructured interviews from a purposive sample of 46 participants (26 emergency department and 20 laboratory and medical imaging staff) across 3 Australian hospitals. Iterative, inductive coding of the data led to the development of higher-level themes based on relationships between codes. RESULTS: Two overarching themes emerged: (1) usability and safety of the electronic test result management system; and (2) system redesign considerations about who is meant to follow up, when and how. The usability and safety of digital systems and the way these systems deal with accountability processes are triggered by mechanisms that are contextually dependent. DISCUSSION: Our findings highlighted the multitransactional nature of the test result management process involving numerous healthcare professionals across different settings. This communication requires integration of the systems utilized by different departments and transparency of the test result follow-up process to facilitate clear lines of responsibility and accountability. CONCLUSION: Identifying mechanisms that shape the functionality and sustainability of electronic result management can offer a valuable appreciation of key elements that need to be accounted for, and the circumstances in which they need to operate effectively.

Why is there variation in test ordering practices for patients presenting to the emergency department with undifferentiated chest pain? A qualitative study.

INTRODUCTION: Up to one-third of laboratory tests ordered in the ED for adults presenting with undifferentiated chest pain are generally not indicated by current Australian guidelines. This study set out to undertake a qualitative investigation of clinician perceptions to identify the reasons for variations in pathology requesting. METHODS: For this study, we draw on data from semistructured interviews (n=38) conducted in the EDs and laboratories across three hospitals as part of a larger study on the test result management process from test request to result follow-up. Thematic analysis was conducted to determine what aspects of the clinical routines and environment might contribute to variations in pathology requesting. Informed by the findings from the analysis, targeted questions were developed and further focus groups (n=5) were held with clinicians, hospital management and electronic medical record (eMR) analysts to investigate in more detail the reasons for requesting outside of guidelines. RESULTS: Participants cited four main reasons for ordering outside of guidelines. Clinicians requested tests outside of guidelines and the ED scope of practice to facilitate the patient journey along the broader continuum of care, including admission to hospital or transfer to another site. Clinicians were also faced with multiple and inconsistent guidelines regarding appropriate test selection. Limited access to in-house specialty and diagnostic services also influenced ordering patterns in smaller non-referral hospitals. Finally, certain features of the current electronic ordering framework within the eMR facilitated overordering and failed to impose any real restrictions on ordering inappropriately or outside of scope of practice. CONCLUSION: Beyond the standardisation of pathology requesting advice across electronic decision support, order sets and guidelines, attempts to address issues related to the appropriateness and variation of laboratory test ordering should consider local and systemic factors which also shape the ordering process.

How patients describe their diagnosis compared to clinical documentation.

OBJECTIVES: To explore how patients describe their diagnoses following Emergency Department (ED) discharge, and how this compares to electronic medical record (EMR) documentation. METHODS: We conducted a cohort study of patients discharged from three EDs. Patients completed questionnaires regarding their understanding of their diagnosis. Inclusion criteria: adult ED patients aged 18 and older seen within the last seven days. We independently compared patient-reported new diagnoses following discharge to EMR-documented diagnoses regarding diagnostic content (identical, insignificantly different, different, not enough detail) and the level of technical language in diagnostic description (technical, semi-technical, lay). RESULTS: The majority of participants (n=95 out of 137) reported receiving a diagnosis and stated the given diagnosis. Of those who reported their diagnosis, 66%, were females (n=62), the average age was 43 (SD 16), and a fourth (n=24) were Black and 66% (n=63) were white. The majority (84%) described either the same or an insignificantly different diagnosis. For 11% the patient-reported diagnosis differed from the one documented. More than half reported their diagnosis using semi-technical (34%) or technical language (26%), and over a third (40%) described their diagnosis in lay language. CONCLUSIONS: Patient-reported diagnoses following ED discharge had moderate agreement with EMR-documented diagnoses. Findings suggest that patients might reproduce verbatim semi-technical or technical diagnoses they received from clinicians, but not fully understood what the diagnosis means for them.

Evaluation of the accuracy of diagnostic coding for influenza compared to laboratory results: the availability of test results before hospital discharge facilitates improved coding accuracy.

BACKGROUND: Assessing the accuracy of diagnostic coding is essential to ensure the validity and reliability of administrative coded data. The aim of the study was to evaluate the accuracy of assigned International Classification of Diseases version 10-Australian Modification (ICD-10-AM) codes for influenza by comparing with patients' results of their polymerase chain reaction (PCR)-based laboratory tests. METHOD: A retrospective study was conducted across seven public hospitals in New South Wales, Australia. A total of 16,439 patients who were admitted and tested by either cartridge-based rapid PCR or batched multiplex PCR between January 2016 and December 2017 met the inclusion criteria. We calculated the sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV) of ICD-10-AM coding using laboratory results as a gold standard. Separate analyses were conducted to determine whether the availability of test results at the time of hospital discharge influenced diagnostic coding accuracy. RESULTS: Laboratory results revealed 2759 positive influenza cases, while ICD-10-AM coding identified 2527 patients. Overall, 13.7% (n = 378) of test positive patients were not assigned an ICD-10-AM code for influenza. A further 5.8% (n = 146) patients with negative test results were incorrectly assigned an ICD-10-AM code for influenza. The sensitivity, specificity, PPV and NPV of ICD-10-AM coding were 93.1%; 98.9%; 94.5% and 98.6% respectively when test results were received before discharge and 32.7%; 99.2%; 87.8% and 89.8% respectively when test results were not available at discharge. The sensitivity of ICD-10-AM coding varied significantly across hospitals. The use of rapid PCR or hospitalisation during the influenza season were associated with greater coding accuracy. CONCLUSION: Although ICD-10-AM coding for influenza demonstrated high accuracy when laboratory results were received before discharge, its sensitivity was substantially lower for patients whose test results were not available at discharge. The timely availability of laboratory test results during the episode of care could contribute to improved coding accuracy.

How is test-related information communicated in Australian Emergency Departments? - ED clinicians' and patients' perspectives.

OBJECTIVES: To investigate the communication processes involving test-related information in Australian Emergency Departments (EDs); specifically what and how ED clinicians communicate test-related information to patients, what patients know and understand about the provided information, and how patients view the potential to access their test-results electronically. METHODS: We conducted face-to-face semi-structured interviews with clinicians (n = 26) and patients (n = 32) across three Australian EDs. Interviews were transcribed and analysed iteratively, following principles of qualitative content analysis and grounded theory. RESULTS: Depending on various contextual (e.g. time pressures) and patient factors (e.g. perceived health literacy), ED clinicians provided, and patients recalled receiving, test-related information along a continuum, ranging from "no or limited" information to "specific" information. Many patients were confused about how to access their test-results. Patients welcomed the potential for future electronic access to results but viewed their individual health and/or computer literacy skills and knowledge as potential barriers. CONCLUSIONS: EDs are highly dynamic environments where contextual forces impinge on the amount and quality of test-related information that clinicians communicate to ED patients. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Systemic and patient factors need to be addressed to optimise the provision of test-related information in ED settings, improve patient understanding and foster patient empowerment.

Can patients contribute to enhancing the safety and effectiveness of test-result follow-up? Qualitative outcomes from a health consumer workshop.

BACKGROUND: Missed test-results and failure to follow-up test-results are major patient safety concerns. Strategies to improve test-results management have predominantly focused on clinician-based interventions, with patients principally involved in studies of test-result communication preferences, the impact of patient portals or experiences with reporting processes in primary care. OBJECTIVE: To identify consumer perspectives and experiences of the challenges they have faced with test-results management, through consumer participation in qualitative data analysis. DESIGN AND PARTICIPANTS: Volunteers (n = 10) were recruited to participate in a health consumer reference group workshop on test-results management. Prior to the workshop, consumers selected topics for discussion using a preference poll. During the workshop, consumers participated in qualitative data analysis of de-identified excerpts of previously collected interview data discussing hospital test-results management. Researchers (n = 5) guided consumers through the analytical process and discussion of themes. Discussions were audio-recorded and transcribed for qualitative analysis. RESULTS: Consumer-selected topics for discussion were 'Transitions of Care' and 'Access'. Consumer data analysis prompted broader discussion including lived experiences. Following the workshop, a second level of content analysis pinpointed issues with implications for patient safety highlighting that consumers were astutely aware of macrolevel 'Systems Factors' relating to 'Emergency Departments' and the health system, as well as microlevel 'Patient Factors' (eg patient preferences and circumstances) which impact a patient's understanding during the 'Communication' (clinician to patient/between clinicians) of test-results 'Information' (or lack thereof). CONCLUSIONS: Consumers identified the challenges patients experience with test-results management, and our findings highlight areas for potential improvement in patient safety. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: Ten health consumer volunteers actively participated in the test-results management data analysis workshop conducted in this study. Two health consumers also volunteered to read and comment on the draft manuscript.

Health Information and the Quality and Safety of Care for People With Disability: An Analysis of Australian Reports of Reviewable Deaths in Residential Care.

OBJECTIVE: Many Australians with disability live in residential care and require assistance to manage their health information across hybrid care settings encompassing residential care, primary and tertiary care, and allied health. In this study, we examined case study reports on people with disability living in residential care in New South Wales, Australia to (a) identify threats to the quality of care and safety for this vulnerable patient group in relation to health documentation and information infrastructure and (b) evaluate the applicability of a conceptual health information infrastructure model. METHODS: All 99 case studies were extracted from eight New South Wales Ombudsmen reports of reviewable deaths for a directed content analysis applying a conceptual model of health information infrastructure in residential care. RESULTS: Ninety-one percent of case studies (n = 90) contained information relation to documentation. Forty-seven percent of case studies (n = 47) linked failures in documentation to risk of death, and 12% (n = 12) described best practice use of documentation. Threats to quality of care and safety related to poor "coordination" of information, including information not being implemented, poor "communication" across services, and discrepancies between "policy and practice" in health management. CONCLUSIONS: The conceptual model demonstrated how "coordination" and "communication" of health information relate to tensions between "policy and practice," influencing the safety and quality of care for people with disability in residential care. The model was a good fit to investigate how health information infrastructure may affect the quality of residential care and could inform holistic digital solutions to deliver safer, integrated, and higher quality care for people with disability.

Assessing the information quality and usability of My Health Record within a health literacy framework: What's changed since 2016?

BACKGROUND: This study examined the health literacy demands of My Health Record (MyHR) in the context of preparing for a government-announced opt-out system by repeating two studies of health information and usability conducted in 2016. OBJECTIVE: To examine whether Australia's MyHR meets the information and usability needs of people at risk of low health literacy and changes since 2016. METHOD: Content analysis: Informed by the 2016 methods and findings, measures of information quality, themes and target audiences were recorded and reported for each online consumer-facing health information resource. Heuristic evaluation: An evaluation of the MyHR and supporting information website was conducted using a predetermined checklist of usability criteria. A list of usability violations for both websites was identified. RESULTS: Total number of resources grew from 80 in 2016 to 233 in 2018. There was little change since 2016 to average readability levels, target audiences, presentation style, links between resources and usability of MyHR. Compared to 2016, this study demonstrated increases in resources from non-government organisations; video resources; translated resources; and resources with themes of privacy, security and post-registration use. CONCLUSION: This study identified some improvements in information quality since 2016, but gaps remain in information quality and usability which may negatively impact the ability for people with low health literacy to access and use MyHR. IMPLICATIONS: This study provides a framework for ongoing monitoring and evaluation of the suitability of MyHR for people at risk of low health literacy.

Variation in electronic test results management and its implications for patient safety: A multisite investigation.

OBJECTIVE: The management and follow-up of diagnostic test results is a major patient safety concern. The aim of this qualitative study was to explore how clinicians manage test results on an everyday basis (work-as-done) in a health information technology-enabled emergency department setting. The objectives were to identify (1) variations in work-as-done in test results management and (2) the strategies clinicians use to ensure optimal management of diagnostic test results. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Qualitative interviews (n = 26) and field observations were conducted across 3 Australian emergency departments. Interview data coded for results management (ie, tracking, acknowledgment, and follow-up), and artifacts, were reviewed to identify variations in descriptions of work-as-done. Thematic analysis was performed to identify common themes. RESULTS: Despite using the same test result management application, there were variations in how the system was used. We identified 5 themes relating to electronic test results management: (1) tracking test results, (2) use and understanding of system functionality, (3) visibility of result actions and acknowledgment, (4) results inbox use, and (5) challenges associated with the absence of an inbox for results notifications for advanced practice nurses. DISCUSSION: Our findings highlight that variations in work-as-done can function to overcome perceived impediments to managing test results in a HIT-enabled environment and thus identify potential risks in the process. By illuminating work-as-done, we identified strategies clinicians use to enhance test result management including paper-based manual processes, cognitive reminders, and adaptive use of electronic medical record functionality. CONCLUSIONS: Test results tracking and follow-up is a priority area in need of health information technology development and training to improve team-based collaboration/communication of results follow-up and diagnostic safety.