Consultants' and referrers' perceived barriers to closing the cross-institutional referral loop, and perceived impact on clinical care.
Communication
Consultation
Health information exchange
Primary care
Usability
Journal
International journal of medical informatics
ISSN: 1872-8243
Titre abrégé: Int J Med Inform
Pays: Ireland
ID NLM: 9711057
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Dec 2023
Dec 2023
Historique:
received:
14
06
2023
revised:
17
09
2023
accepted:
15
10
2023
medline:
20
11
2023
pubmed:
2
11
2023
entrez:
1
11
2023
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Cross-institutional (external) referrals are prone to communication breakdowns, increasing patient safety risks, clinician burnout, and healthcare costs. To close these external referral loops, referring primary care physicians (PCPs) need to receive patient information from consultants at different healthcare institutions. Although existing studies investigated the early phases of external referral loops, we lack sufficient knowledge about the closing phases of these loops. This knowledge could allow health care institutions to improve care coordination and rates of closed referral loops by implementing socio-technical interventions for patient information exchange throughout a referral loop. Human factors engineering (HFE) provides a systematic approach to advance our understanding of barriers perceived by physicians. Using HFE, our objective was to characterize referring and consulting physicians' barriers to closing referral loops and implications for care. This qualitative cross-sectional study included semi-structured interviews with referrers and external consultants. We used the Systems Engineering Initiative for Patient Safety 2.0 framework to conduct rapid qualitative analyses, determining perceived barriers and related implications. Main measures were consultants' and referrers' perceptions of, and experiences with, barriers to external referrals. Six referring PCPs and 12 consultants participated from two healthcare systems and four medical specialties. Physicians perceived three main barriers in external referrals: receipt of excessive and unnecessary faxed documents, missing or delayed documentation, and organizational policies regarding information privacy interfering with closing the loop. Compared to internal referrals, physicians reported increased staff burden, patient frustration, and delays in diagnosis with external referrals. Consultants reported the ability to provide the same level of care to patients with internal or external referrals. However, consultants described communication breakdowns that prohibited confirmation of follow-up plan retrieval, initiation, or effectiveness. Physicians reported technological and organizational barriers to closing cross-institutional referral loops. Promises of HIE technology for external referrals have not fully materialized. Among physicians and patients, retrieval and exchange of medical information increases perceived workload, burden, and frustration. These increases are not accurately captured by traditional organizational metrics. This study provides evidence that informs future human factors engineering research to address perceived barriers and guide future HIE design or implementation.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Cross-institutional (external) referrals are prone to communication breakdowns, increasing patient safety risks, clinician burnout, and healthcare costs. To close these external referral loops, referring primary care physicians (PCPs) need to receive patient information from consultants at different healthcare institutions. Although existing studies investigated the early phases of external referral loops, we lack sufficient knowledge about the closing phases of these loops. This knowledge could allow health care institutions to improve care coordination and rates of closed referral loops by implementing socio-technical interventions for patient information exchange throughout a referral loop. Human factors engineering (HFE) provides a systematic approach to advance our understanding of barriers perceived by physicians. Using HFE, our objective was to characterize referring and consulting physicians' barriers to closing referral loops and implications for care.
METHODS
METHODS
This qualitative cross-sectional study included semi-structured interviews with referrers and external consultants. We used the Systems Engineering Initiative for Patient Safety 2.0 framework to conduct rapid qualitative analyses, determining perceived barriers and related implications. Main measures were consultants' and referrers' perceptions of, and experiences with, barriers to external referrals.
RESULTS
RESULTS
Six referring PCPs and 12 consultants participated from two healthcare systems and four medical specialties. Physicians perceived three main barriers in external referrals: receipt of excessive and unnecessary faxed documents, missing or delayed documentation, and organizational policies regarding information privacy interfering with closing the loop. Compared to internal referrals, physicians reported increased staff burden, patient frustration, and delays in diagnosis with external referrals. Consultants reported the ability to provide the same level of care to patients with internal or external referrals. However, consultants described communication breakdowns that prohibited confirmation of follow-up plan retrieval, initiation, or effectiveness.
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
Physicians reported technological and organizational barriers to closing cross-institutional referral loops. Promises of HIE technology for external referrals have not fully materialized. Among physicians and patients, retrieval and exchange of medical information increases perceived workload, burden, and frustration. These increases are not accurately captured by traditional organizational metrics. This study provides evidence that informs future human factors engineering research to address perceived barriers and guide future HIE design or implementation.
Identifiants
pubmed: 37913622
pii: S1386-5056(23)00283-6
doi: 10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2023.105265
pii:
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
105265Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2023. Published by Elsevier B.V.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.