Improving Primary Care Medication Processes by Using Shared Electronic Medication Plans in Switzerland: Lessons Learned From a Participatory Action Research Study.

Switzerland complex adaptive system eHealth electronic health records health information technology implementation medication medication list medication reconciliation national eHealth strategy participatory action research primary care shared electronic medication plan

Journal

JMIR formative research
ISSN: 2561-326X
Titre abrégé: JMIR Form Res
Pays: Canada
ID NLM: 101726394

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
07 Jan 2021
Historique:
received: 08 07 2020
accepted: 07 12 2020
revised: 23 09 2020
entrez: 7 1 2021
pubmed: 8 1 2021
medline: 8 1 2021
Statut: epublish

Résumé

Several countries have launched health information technology (HIT) systems for shared electronic medication plans. These systems enable patients and health care professionals to use and manage a common list of current medications across sectors and settings. Shared electronic medication plans have great potential to improve medication management and patient safety, but their integration into complex medication-related processes has proven difficult, and there is little scientific evidence to guide their implementation. The objective of this paper is to summarize lessons learned from primary care professionals involved in a pioneering pilot project in Switzerland for the systemwide implementation of shared electronic medication plans. We collected experiences, assessed the influences of the local context, and analyzed underlying mechanisms influencing the implementation. In this formative action research study, we followed 5 clusters of health care professionals during 6 months. The clusters represented rural and urban primary care settings. A total of 18 health care professionals (primary care physicians, pharmacists, and nurses) used the pilot version of a shared electronic medication plan on a secure web platform, the precursor of Switzerland's electronic patient record infrastructure. We undertook 3 group interviews with each of the 5 clusters, analyzed the content longitudinally and across clusters, and summarized it into lessons learned. Participants considered medication plan management, digitalized or not, a core element of good clinical practice. Requirements for the successful implementation of a shared electronic medication plan were the integration into and simplification of clinical routines. Participants underlined the importance of an enabling setting with designated reference professionals and regular high-quality interactions with patients. Such a setting should foster trusting relationships and nurture a culture of safety and data privacy. For participants, the HIT was a necessary but insufficient building block toward better interprofessional communication, especially in transitions. Despite oral and written information, the availability of shared electronic medication plans did not generate spontaneous demand from patients or foster more engagement in their medication management. The variable settings illustrated the diversity of medication management and the need for local adaptations. The results of our study present a unique and comprehensive description of the sociotechnical challenges of implementing shared electronic medication plans in primary care. The shared ownership among multiple stakeholders is a core challenge for implementers. No single stakeholder can build and maintain a safe, usable HIT system with up-to-date medication information. Buy-in from all involved health care professionals is necessary for consistent medication reconciliation along the entire care pathway. Implementers must balance the need to change clinical processes to achieve improvements with the need to integrate the shared electronic medication plan into existing routines to facilitate adoption. The lack of patient involvement warrants further study.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND BACKGROUND
Several countries have launched health information technology (HIT) systems for shared electronic medication plans. These systems enable patients and health care professionals to use and manage a common list of current medications across sectors and settings. Shared electronic medication plans have great potential to improve medication management and patient safety, but their integration into complex medication-related processes has proven difficult, and there is little scientific evidence to guide their implementation.
OBJECTIVE OBJECTIVE
The objective of this paper is to summarize lessons learned from primary care professionals involved in a pioneering pilot project in Switzerland for the systemwide implementation of shared electronic medication plans. We collected experiences, assessed the influences of the local context, and analyzed underlying mechanisms influencing the implementation.
METHODS METHODS
In this formative action research study, we followed 5 clusters of health care professionals during 6 months. The clusters represented rural and urban primary care settings. A total of 18 health care professionals (primary care physicians, pharmacists, and nurses) used the pilot version of a shared electronic medication plan on a secure web platform, the precursor of Switzerland's electronic patient record infrastructure. We undertook 3 group interviews with each of the 5 clusters, analyzed the content longitudinally and across clusters, and summarized it into lessons learned.
RESULTS RESULTS
Participants considered medication plan management, digitalized or not, a core element of good clinical practice. Requirements for the successful implementation of a shared electronic medication plan were the integration into and simplification of clinical routines. Participants underlined the importance of an enabling setting with designated reference professionals and regular high-quality interactions with patients. Such a setting should foster trusting relationships and nurture a culture of safety and data privacy. For participants, the HIT was a necessary but insufficient building block toward better interprofessional communication, especially in transitions. Despite oral and written information, the availability of shared electronic medication plans did not generate spontaneous demand from patients or foster more engagement in their medication management. The variable settings illustrated the diversity of medication management and the need for local adaptations.
CONCLUSIONS CONCLUSIONS
The results of our study present a unique and comprehensive description of the sociotechnical challenges of implementing shared electronic medication plans in primary care. The shared ownership among multiple stakeholders is a core challenge for implementers. No single stakeholder can build and maintain a safe, usable HIT system with up-to-date medication information. Buy-in from all involved health care professionals is necessary for consistent medication reconciliation along the entire care pathway. Implementers must balance the need to change clinical processes to achieve improvements with the need to integrate the shared electronic medication plan into existing routines to facilitate adoption. The lack of patient involvement warrants further study.

Identifiants

pubmed: 33410753
pii: v5i1e22319
doi: 10.2196/22319
pmc: PMC7819781
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Pagination

e22319

Informations de copyright

©Benjamin Bugnon, Antoine Geissbuhler, Thomas Bischoff, Pascal Bonnabry, Christian von Plessen. Originally published in JMIR Formative Research (http://formative.jmir.org), 07.01.2021.

Références

Adv Health Care Manag. 2013;15:125-61
pubmed: 24749215
Res Social Adm Pharm. 2020 Oct;16(10):1370-1378
pubmed: 32061549
Dan Med J. 2014 May;61(5):A4817
pubmed: 24814735
Isr J Health Policy Res. 2013 Oct 23;2(1):41
pubmed: 24153050
Ann Pharmacother. 2014 Oct;48(10):1298-312
pubmed: 25048794
Int J Med Inform. 2013 May;82(5):e125-38
pubmed: 23434362
Int J Med Inform. 2017 Jan;97:266-281
pubmed: 27919385
BMJ Qual Saf. 2016 Jul;25(7):509-17
pubmed: 26376674
Int J Med Inform. 2016 Sep;93:14-25
pubmed: 27435943
Ann Pharmacother. 2010 May;44(5):885-97
pubmed: 20371752
Stud Health Technol Inform. 2014;201:175-80
pubmed: 24943541
Health Expect. 2010 Dec;13(4):379-91
pubmed: 20579117
Int J Med Inform. 2011 Nov;80(11):775-81
pubmed: 21956001
BMJ. 2008 Oct 23;337:a1786
pubmed: 18948344
BMC Health Serv Res. 2013 Dec 20;13:528
pubmed: 24359610
Health Policy. 2018 Feb;122(2):69-74
pubmed: 29153922
Int J Clin Pharm. 2014 Oct;36(5):933-42
pubmed: 25193264
J Healthc Leadersh. 2019 Mar 29;11:23-41
pubmed: 31114416
Eur J Clin Pharmacol. 2016 Oct;72(10):1229-1237
pubmed: 27305905
Int J Med Inform. 2013 May;82(5):e149-60
pubmed: 23313431
BMJ Qual Saf. 2018 Jul;27(7):539-546
pubmed: 29146681
Appl Clin Inform. 2014 Jun 04;5(2):527-37
pubmed: 25024766
Stud Health Technol Inform. 2013;192:1090
pubmed: 23920864
J Clin Pharm Ther. 2013 Jun;38(3):219-24
pubmed: 23350784
BMJ Open. 2019 May 27;9(5):e026259
pubmed: 31133583
BMJ Qual Saf. 2016 Sep;25(9):726-30
pubmed: 26795914
Int J Integr Care. 2012 Sep 18;12:e190
pubmed: 23593051
J Eval Clin Pract. 2018 Aug;24(4):681-687
pubmed: 29761596
Int J Med Inform. 2014 Sep;83(9):655-69
pubmed: 24986321
Rev Med Suisse. 2013 May 15;9(386):1021-5
pubmed: 23745235
Health Policy Plan. 2012 Aug;27(5):365-73
pubmed: 21821667
NPJ Digit Med. 2018 Sep 20;1:48
pubmed: 31304327
Ann Pharmacother. 2002 Jul-Aug;36(7-8):1238-48
pubmed: 12086559
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018 Aug 23;8:CD010791
pubmed: 30136718
Qual Manag Health Care. 2019 Apr/Jun;28(2):84-95
pubmed: 30801417
CMAJ. 2005 Aug 30;173(5):510-5
pubmed: 16129874
Healthc Q. 2011;14(1):39-45
pubmed: 21301238
BMJ. 2003 Nov 22;327(7425):1219-21
pubmed: 14630762
BMJ Qual Saf. 2021 Feb;30(2):96-105
pubmed: 32527980
BMC Med. 2009 Sep 21;7:50
pubmed: 19772551
J Med Internet Res. 2011 Dec 05;13(4):e111
pubmed: 22155738
J Gen Intern Med. 2006 Feb;21 Suppl 2:S1-8
pubmed: 16637954
BMJ. 2010 Aug 27;341:c4413
pubmed: 20802000
EGEMS (Wash DC). 2014 Oct 01;2(3):1080
pubmed: 25848614
Health Policy Plan. 2012 Oct;27 Suppl 4:iv54-61
pubmed: 23014154
Int J Clin Pharm. 2019 Jun;41(3):687-690
pubmed: 31028600
Milbank Q. 2012 Sep;90(3):421-56
pubmed: 22985277
J Eval Clin Pract. 2012 Feb;18(1):202-8
pubmed: 22221420
BMC Health Serv Res. 2013 Nov 21;13:485
pubmed: 24261516
Int J Med Inform. 2010 Mar;79(3):211-22
pubmed: 20079685
Int J Clin Pharm. 2013 Dec;35(6):1040-52
pubmed: 24022724
Lancet. 2017 Apr 29;389(10080):1680-1681
pubmed: 28463129

Auteurs

Benjamin Bugnon (B)

Institute of Pharmaceutical Sciences of Western Switzerland, University of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland.
Direction Générale de la Santé, État de Vaud, Lausanne, Switzerland.

Antoine Geissbuhler (A)

Department of Radiology and Medical Informatics, University of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland.

Thomas Bischoff (T)

Direction Générale de la Santé, État de Vaud, Lausanne, Switzerland.

Pascal Bonnabry (P)

Institute of Pharmaceutical Sciences of Western Switzerland, University of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland.

Christian von Plessen (C)

Direction Générale de la Santé, État de Vaud, Lausanne, Switzerland.
Department of Clinical Research, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark.
Center for Primary Care and Public Health, Unisanté, Lausanne, Switzerland.

Classifications MeSH