Download PDF
Appl Clin Inform 2023; 14(04): 693-704
DOI: 10.1055/s-0043-1771394
Research Article

Development and Validation of SafeHIT: An Instrument to Assess the Self-Reported Safe Use of Health Information Technology

Lizawati Salahuddin
1   Center for Advanced Computing Technology (C-ACT) Fakulti Teknologi Maklumat dan Komunikasi, Universiti Teknikal Malaysia Melaka (UTeM), Durian Tunggal, Melaka, Malaysia
,
Zuraini Ismail
2   Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
,
Fiza Abdul Rahim
3   Advanced Informatics Department Razak Faculty of Technology and Informatics, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia (UTM), Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
,
Syarulnaziah Anawar
1   Center for Advanced Computing Technology (C-ACT) Fakulti Teknologi Maklumat dan Komunikasi, Universiti Teknikal Malaysia Melaka (UTeM), Durian Tunggal, Melaka, Malaysia
,
Ummi Rabaah Hashim
1   Center for Advanced Computing Technology (C-ACT) Fakulti Teknologi Maklumat dan Komunikasi, Universiti Teknikal Malaysia Melaka (UTeM), Durian Tunggal, Melaka, Malaysia
› Author Affiliations Funding This work was supported by Universiti Teknikal Malaysia Melaka (UTeM) research grant (grant number: JURNAL/2020/FTMK/Q00055) and the Ministry of Higher Education (MOHE) Malaysia.
› Further Information
Also available at
    Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Background Implementing health information technology (HIT) may cause unintended consequences and safety risks when incorrectly designed and used. Yet, the tools to assess self-reported safe use of HIT are not well established.

Objective This study aims to develop and validate SafeHIT, an instrument to assess self-reported safe use of HIT among health care practitioners.

Methods Systematic literature review and a semistructured interview with 31 experts were adopted to generate SafeHIT instrument items. In total, 450 physicians from various departments at three Malaysian public hospitals participated in the questionnaire survey to validate SafeHIT. Exploratory factor analysis and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) were undertaken to explore the items that best represent a specific construct and to confirm the reliability and validity of the SafeHIT, respectively.

Results The final SafeHIT consisted of 14 constructs and 58 items in total. The result of the CFA confirmed that all constructs demonstrated adequate convergent and discriminant validity.

Conclusion A reliable and valid theoretically underpinned measure of determinants of safe HIT use behavior has been developed. Understanding external factors that influence safe HIT use is useful for developing targeted interventions that favor the quality and safety of health care.

Keywords

health information technology - safety - adoption - questionnaire survey - quantitative instrument

Protection of Human and Animal Subjects

The study was performed in compliance with the Ethical Principles for Medical Research Involving Human Subjects and received ethics approval from Malaysia's Ministry of Health Medical Review and Ethics Committee.


Supplementary Material



Publication History

Received: 06 December 2023

Accepted: 05 June 2023

Article published online:
30 August 2023

© 2023. Thieme. All rights reserved.

Georg Thieme Verlag KG
Rüdigerstraße 14, 70469 Stuttgart, Germany

 

  • References

  • 1 Feldman SS, Buchalter S, Hayes LW. Health information technology in healthcare quality and patient safety: literature review. JMIR Med Inform 2018; 6 (02) e10264
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Kruse CS, Beane A. Health information technology continues to show positive effect on medical outcomes: systematic review. J Med Internet Res 2018; 20 (02) e41
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Wang T, Wang Y, McLeod A. Do health information technology investments impact hospital financial performance and productivity?. Int J Account Inf Syst 2017; 2018 (28) 1-13
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Magrabi F, Baker M, Sinha I. et al. Clinical safety of England's national programme for IT: a retrospective analysis of all reported safety events 2005 to 2011. Int J Med Inform 2015; 84 (03) 198-206
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Palojoki S, Mäkelä M, Lehtonen L, Saranto K. An analysis of electronic health record-related patient safety incidents. Health Informatics J 2017; 23 (02) 134-145
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Martin G, Ghafur S, Cingolani I. et al. The effects and preventability of 2627 patient safety incidents related to health information technology failures: a retrospective analysis of 10 years of incident reporting in England and Wales. Lancet Digit Health 2019; 1 (03) e127-e135
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Kim MO, Coiera E, Magrabi F. Problems with health information technology and their effects on care delivery and patient outcomes: a systematic review. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2017; 24 (02) 246-250
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Carayon P, Hoonakker P. Human factors and usability for health information technology: old and new challenges. Yearb Med Inform 2019; 28 (01) 71-77
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Singh H, Sittig DF. Measuring and improving patient safety through health information technology: The Health IT Safety Framework. BMJ Qual Saf 2016; 25 (04) 1-7
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Middleton B, Bloomrosen M, Dente MA. et al; American Medical Informatics Association. Enhancing patient safety and quality of care by improving the usability of electronic health record systems: recommendations from AMIA. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2013; 20 ( e1) e2-e8
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Committee on Patient Safety and Health Information Technology; Institute of Medicine. Health IT and Patient Safety: Building Safer Systems for Better Care. Washington (DC): National Academies Press (US); 2011
    Google Scholar
  • 12 Carayon P, Wetterneck TB, Rivera-Rodriguez AJ. et al. Human factors systems approach to healthcare quality and patient safety. Appl Ergon 2014; 45 (01) 14-25
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Petter S, DeLone W, McLean E. Measuring information systems success: models, dimensions, measures, and interrelationships. Eur J Inf Syst 2008; 17 (03) 236-263
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Sorra JS, Dyer N. Multilevel psychometric properties of the AHRQ hospital survey on patient safety culture. BMC Health Serv Res 2010; 10 (01) 199
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Quality A for HR and Hospital Survey on Patient Safety Culture. Accessed November 01, 2022 at: https://www.ahrq.gov/sops/surveys/hospital/index.html
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Secginli S, Erdogan S, Monsen KA. Attitudes of health professionals towards electronic health records in primary health care settings: a questionnaire survey. Inform Health Soc Care 2014; 39 (01) 15-32
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Sittig DF, Ash JS, Singh H. The SAFER guides: empowering organizations to improve the safety and effectiveness of electronic health records. Am J Manag Care 2014; 20 (05) 418-423
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Hinkin TR. A review of scale development practices in the study of organization. J Manage 1995; 21 (05) 967-988
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Salahuddin L, Ismail Z. Classification of antecedents towards safety use of health information technology: a systematic review. Int J Med Inform 2015; 84 (11) 877-891
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Salahuddin L, Ismail Z, Hashim UR, Raja Ikram RR, Ismail NH, Naim Mohayat MH. Sociotechnical factors influencing unsafe use of hospital information systems: a qualitative study in Malaysian government hospitals. Health Informatics J 2019; 25 (04) 1358-1372
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Salahuddin L, Ismail Z, Hashim UR. et al. Healthcare practitioner behaviours that influence unsafe use of hospital information systems. Health Informatics J 2020; 26 (01) 420-434
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Bhattacherjee A. Social Science Research: Principles, Methods, and Practices. 2nd ed. Scotts Valley, CA: Createspace Independent Pub; 2012
    Google Scholar
  • 23 George D, Mallery P. SPSS for Windows Step by Step: A Simple Guide and Reference. 4th ed. Allyn & Bacon: The University of Michigan; 2003
    Google Scholar
  • 24 Zikmund WG. Business Research Methods. 7th ed. Thomson South-Western; Indiana University; 2003
    Google Scholar
  • 25 Fabrigar LR, Wegener DT, MacCallum RC, Strahan EJ. Evaluating the use of exploratory factor analysis in psychological research. Psychol Methods 1999; 4 (03) 272-299
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Hair JF, Anderson R, Tatham R, Black W. Multivariate Data Analysis. 4th ed. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall Inc.; 1995
    Google Scholar
  • 27 Williams B, Onsman A, Brown T. Exploratory factor analysis: a five-step guide for novices. J Emerg Prim Health Care 2010; 8 (03) 1-13
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Hair J, Black W, Babin B, Anderson R, Tatham R. Multivariate Data Analysis. 7th ed. Prentice Hall; 2010
    Google Scholar
  • 29 Hair JF, Hult GTM, Ringle CM, Sarstedt M. A primer on partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM). Sage 2014
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 30 Epstein RM, Hundert EM. Defining and assessing professional competence. JAMA 2002; 287 (02) 226-235
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 31 Palojoki S, Saranto K, Reponen E, Skants N, Vakkuri A, Vuokko R. Classification of electronic health record–related patient safety incidents: development and validation study. JMIR Med Inform 2021; 9 (08) e30470
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 32 Davy A, Borycki EM. Copy and paste in the electronic medical record: a scoping review. Knowl Manag E-Learning 2021; 13 (04) 522-535
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 33 Kinlay M, Zheng WY, Burke R, Juraskova I, Moles R, Baysari M. Medication errors related to computerized provider order entry systems in hospitals and how they change over time: a narrative review. Res Social Adm Pharm 2021; 17 (09) 1546-1552
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 34 Joseph AL, Stringer E, Borycki EM, Kushniruk AW. Evaluative frameworks and models for health information systems (HIS) and health information technologies (HIT). Stud Health Technol Inform 2022; 289: 280-285
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 35 Zheng K, Ratwani RM, Adler-Milstein J. Studying workflow and workarounds in electronic health record-supported work to improve health system performance. Ann Intern Med 2020; 172 (11) S116-S122
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 36 Redwood S, Rajakumar A, Hodson J, Coleman JJ. Does the implementation of an electronic prescribing system create unintended medication errors? A study of the sociotechnical context through the analysis of reported medication incidents. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak 2011; 11: 29
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 37 Miller GE. The assessment of clinical skills/competence/performance. Acad Med 1990; 65 (09) S63-S67
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 38 Sittig DF, Singh H. Eight rights of safe electronic health record use. JAMA 2009; 302 (10) 1111-1113
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 39 Janols R, Lind T, Göransson B, Sandblad B. Evaluation of user adoption during three module deployments of region-wide electronic patient record systems. Int J Med Inform 2014; 83 (06) 438-449
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 40 DeLone WH, McLean ER. The DeLone and McLean model of information systems success: a ten-year update. J Manage Inf Syst 2003; 19 (04) 9-30
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 41 Viitanen J, Hyppönen H, Lääveri T, Vänskä J, Reponen J, Winblad I. National questionnaire study on clinical ICT systems proofs: physicians suffer from poor usability. Int J Med Inform 2011; 80 (10) 708-725
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 42 Yu P, Zhang Y, Gong Y, Zhang J. Unintended adverse consequences of introducing electronic health records in residential aged care homes. Int J Med Inform 2013; 82 (09) 772-788
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 43 Walji MF, Kalenderian E, Tran D. et al. Detection and characterization of usability problems in structured data entry interfaces in dentistry. Int J Med Inform 2013; 82 (02) 128-138
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 44 Seddon PB, Kiew MY. A partial test and development of Delone and Mclean's Model of IS success. AJIS Aust J Inf Syst 1996; 4 (01) 90-109
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 45 Pitt L, Watson R, Kavan C. Service quality: a measure of information systems effectiveness. Manage Inf Syst Q 1995; 19 (02) 173-187
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 46 Singer S, Meterko M, Baker L, Gaba D, Falwell A, Rosen A. Workforce perceptions of hospital safety culture: development and validation of the patient safety climate in healthcare organizations survey. Health Serv Res 2007; 42 (05) 1999-2021
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 47 Thompson D, Duling L. Computerized physician order entry, a factor in medication errors: descriptive analysis of events in the intensive care unit safety reporting system. J Clin Outcomes Manag 2005; 12 (08) 407-412
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 48 Bradford M, Florin J. Examining the role of innovation diffusion factors on the implementation success of enterprise resource planning systems. Int J Account Inf Syst 2003; 4 (03) 205-225
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 49 Lee F, Teich JM, Spurr CD, Bates DW. Implementation of physician order entry: user satisfaction and self-reported usage patterns. J Am Med Inform Assoc 1996; 3 (01) 42-55
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 50 Evans B, Glendon AI, Creed PA. Development and initial validation of an Aviation Safety Climate Scale. J Safety Res 2007; 38 (06) 675-682
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 51 Ostrom L, Wilhelmsen C, Kaplan B. Assessing safety culture. Nucl Saf 1993; 34 (02) 163-172
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 52 Manser T. Teamwork and patient safety in dynamic domains of healthcare: a review of the literature. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand 2009; 53 (02) 143-151
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 53 Sexton JB, Helmreich RL, Neilands TB. et al. The Safety Attitudes Questionnaire: psychometric properties, benchmarking data, and emerging research. BMC Health Serv Res 2006; 6: 44
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 54 Pirnejad H, Niazkhani Z, van der Sijs H, Berg M, Bal R. Evaluation of the impact of a CPOE system on nurse-physician communication—a mixed method study. Methods Inf Med 2009; 48 (04) 350-360
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 55 Konradt U, Hertel G, Schmook R. Quality of management by objectives, task-related stressors, and non-task-related stressors as predictors of stress and job satisfaction among teleworkers. Eur J Work Organ Psychol 2003; 12 (01) 61-79
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 56 Kinzl JF, Knotzer H, Traweger C, Lederer W, Heidegger T, Benzer A. Influence of working conditions on job satisfaction in anaesthetists. Br J Anaesth 2005; 94 (02) 211-215
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 57 Beuscart-Zéphir MC, Borycki E, Carayon P, Jaspers MWM, Pelayo S. Evolution of human factors research and studies of health information technologies: the role of patient safety. Yearb Med Inform 2013; 8 (01) 67-77
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 58 Saleem JJ, Russ AL, Neddo A, Blades PT, Doebbeling BN, Foresman BH. Paper persistence, workarounds, and communication breakdowns in computerized consultation management. Int J Med Inform 2011; 80 (07) 466-479
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 59 Niazkhani Z, Pirnejad H, van der Sijs H, Aarts J. Evaluating the medication process in the context of CPOE use: the significance of working around the system. Int J Med Inform 2011; 80 (07) 490-506
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 60 Odukoya OK, Chui MA. e-Prescribing: characterisation of patient safety hazards in community pharmacies using a sociotechnical systems approach. BMJ Qual Saf 2013; 22 (10) 816-825
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 61 Westbrook JI, Baysari MT, Li L, Burke R, Richardson KL, Day RO. The safety of electronic prescribing: manifestations, mechanisms, and rates of system-related errors associated with two commercial systems in hospitals. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2013; 20 (06) 1159-1167
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 62 Ash JS, Sittig DF, Dykstra RH, Guappone K, Carpenter JD, Seshadri V. Categorizing the unintended sociotechnical consequences of computerized provider order entry. Int J Med Inform 2007; 76 (Suppl. 01) S21-S27
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 63 Embi PJ, Yackel TR, Logan JR, Bowen JL, Cooney TG, Gorman PN. Impacts of computerized physician documentation in a teaching hospital: perceptions of faculty and resident physicians. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2004; 11 (04) 300-309
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 64 Holden RJ. Cognitive performance-altering effects of electronic medical records: an application of the human factors paradigm for patient safety. Cogn Technol Work 2011; 13 (01) 11-29
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 65 Santell JP, Kowiatek JG, Weber RJ, Hicks RW, Sirio CA. Medication errors resulting from computer entry by nonprescribers. Am J Health Syst Pharm 2009; 66 (09) 843-853
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 66 Hoonakker PL, Cartmill RS, Carayon P, Walker JM. Development and psychometric qualities of the SEIPS survey to evaluate CPOE/EHR implementation in ICUs. Int J Healthc Inf Syst Inform 2011; 6 (01) 51-69
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 67 Love JS, Wright A, Simon SR. et al. Are physicians' perceptions of healthcare quality and practice satisfaction affected by errors associated with electronic health record use?. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2012; 19 (04) 610-614
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar