Abstract
Abstract
Purpose
Patient misidentification in radiation oncology (RO) is a significant concern due to the potential harm to patient health and the burden on healthcare systems. Electronic patient identification systems (ePIS) are increasingly being used as an alternative or supplement to organizational systems (oPIS). The objective of this study was to assess the usability and usefulness of ePIS and oPIS in German-speaking countries.
Methods
A cross-sectional survey was designed by a group of experts from various professional backgrounds in RO. The survey consisted of 38 questions encompassing quantitative and qualitative data on usability, user experience, and usefulness of PIS. It was available between August and October 2022.
Results
Of 118 eligible participants, 37% had implemented some kind of ePIS. Overall, 22% of participants who use an oPIS vs. 10% of participants who use an ePIS reported adverse events in terms of patients’ misidentification in the past 5 years. Frequent or very frequent drop-outs of electronic systems were reported by 31% of ePIS users. Users of ePIS significantly more often affirmed a positive cost–benefit ratio of ePIS as well as an improvement of workflow, whereas users of oPIS more frequently apprehended a decrease in staffs’ attention through ePIS. The response rate was 8%.
Conclusion
The implementation of ePIS can contribute to efficient PI and improved processes. Apprehensions by oPIS users and assessments of ePIS users differ significantly in aspects of the perceived usefulness of ePIS. However, technical problems need to be addressed to ensure the reliability of ePIS. Further research is needed to assess the impact of different PIS on patient safety in RO.
Funder
Universitätsklinikum Hamburg-Eppendorf (UKE)
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
Oncology,Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and imaging
Reference36 articles.
1. Slawomirski L, Auraaen A, Klazinga N (2017) The economics of patient safety. Strengthening a value-based approach to reducing patient harm at national level
2. Lippi G, Mattiuzzi C, Bovo C, Favaloro EJ (2017) Managing the patient identification crisis in healthcare and laboratory medicine. Clin Biochem 50:562–567
3. French Nuclear Safety Authority (ASN) (2011) Patient safety—paving the way for progress. Patient identification (La sécurité du patient N°1 Bulletin à l’attention des professionnels de la radiothérapie. Pour une dynamique de progrès)
4. Vorwerk H et al (2014) Protection of quality and innovation in radiation oncology: the prospective multicenter trial the German Society of Radiation Oncology (DEGRO-QUIRO study). Evaluation of time, attendance of medical staff, and resources during radiotherapy with IMRT. Strahlenther Onkol 190:433–443
5. American Society for Radiation Oncology (ASTRO) (2019) Safety is no accident (https://www.astro.org/Patient-Care-and-Research/Patient-Safety/Safety-is-no-Accident/SINA-Digital-Book)