Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2024 Mar;30(2):184-198.
doi: 10.1111/jep.13923. Epub 2023 Sep 18.

Factors influencing the successful implementation of a novel digital health application to streamline multidisciplinary communication across multiple organisations for emergency care

Affiliations

Factors influencing the successful implementation of a novel digital health application to streamline multidisciplinary communication across multiple organisations for emergency care

Kathleen L Bagot et al. J Eval Clin Pract. 2024 Mar.

Abstract

Rationale: Delivering optimal patient health care requires interdisciplinary clinician communication. A single communication tool across multiple pre-hospital and hospital settings, and between hospital departments is a novel solution to current systems. Fit-for-purpose, secure smartphone applications allow clinical information to be shared quickly between health providers. Little is known as to what underpins their successful implementation in an emergency care context.

Aims: To identify (a) whether implementing a single, digital health communication application across multiple health care organisations and hospital departments is feasible; (b) the barriers and facilitators to implementation; and (c) which factors are associated with clinicians' intentions to use the technology.

Methods: We used a multimethod design, evaluating the implementation of a secure, digital communication application (Pulsara™). The technology was trialled in two Australian regional hospitals and 25 Ambulance Victoria branches (AV). Post-training, clinicians involved in treating patients with suspected stroke or cardiac events were administered surveys measuring perceived organisational readiness (Organisational Readiness for Implementing Change), clinicians' intentions (Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology) and internal motivations (Self-Determination Theory) to use Pulsara™, and the perceived benefits and barriers of use. Quantitative data were descriptively summarised with multivariable associations between factors and intentions to use Pulsara™ examined with linear regression. Qualitative data responses were subjected to directed content analysis (two coders).

Results: Participants were paramedics (n = 82, median 44 years) or hospital-based clinicians (n = 90, median 37 years), with organisations perceived to be similarly ready. Regression results (F(11, 136) = 21.28, p = <0.001, Adj R2 = 0.60) indicated Habit, Effort Expectancy, Perceived Organisational Readiness, Performance Expectancy and Organisation membership (AV) as predictors of intending to use Pulsara™. Themes relating to benefits (95% coder agreement) included improved communication, procedural efficiencies and faster patient care. Barriers (92% coder agreement) included network accessibility and remembering passwords. PulsaraTM was initiated 562 times.

Conclusion: Implementing multiorganisational, digital health communication applications is feasible, and facilitated when organisations are change-ready for an easy-to-use, effective solution. Developing habitual use is key, supported through implementation strategies (e.g., hands-on training). Benefits should be emphasised (e.g., during education sessions), including streamlining communication and patient flow, and barriers addressed (e.g., identify champions and local technical support) at project commencement.

Keywords: communication barriers; disruptive technology; evaluation; health services research; implementation science; patient-centred care.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

REFERENCES

    1. Leape LL, Berwick DM. Five years after to err is human: what have we learned? JAMA. 2005;293(19):2384-2390.
    1. Sutcliffe KM, Lewton E, Rosenthal MM. Communication failures: an insidious contributor to medical mishaps. Acad Med. 2004;79(2):186-194.
    1. Dinh DT, Wang Y, Brennan AL, et al. Delays in primary percutaneous coronary treatment for patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction. Med J Aust. 2018;209(3):130-131.
    1. Emberson J, Lees KR, Lyden P, et al. Effect of treatment delay, age, and stroke severity on the effects of intravenous thrombolysis with alteplase for acute ischaemic stroke: a meta-analysis of individual patient data from randomised trials. Lancet. 2014;384(9958):1929-1935.
    1. Chen H-L, Liu K. Effect of door-to-balloon time on in-hospital mortality in patients with myocardial infarction: a meta-analysis. Int J Cardiol. 2015;187:130-133.

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources