↓ Skip to main content

Understanding the implementation and adoption of a technological intervention to improve medication safety in primary care: a realist evaluation

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Health Services Research, March 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (71st percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (68th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
8 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
20 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
144 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Understanding the implementation and adoption of a technological intervention to improve medication safety in primary care: a realist evaluation
Published in
BMC Health Services Research, March 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12913-017-2131-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Mark Jeffries, Denham L. Phipps, Rachel L. Howard, Anthony J. Avery, Sarah Rodgers, Darren M. Ashcroft

Abstract

Monitoring for potentially hazardous prescribing is increasingly important to improve medication safety. Healthcare information technology can be used to achieve this aim, for example by providing access to prescribing data through surveillance of patients' electronic health records. The aim of our study was to examine the implementation and adoption of an electronic medicines optimisation system that was intended to facilitate clinical audit in primary care by identifying patients at risk of an adverse drug event. We adopted a sociotechnical approach that focuses on how complex social, organisational and institutional factors may impact upon the use of technology within work settings. We undertook a qualitative realist evaluation of the use of an electronic medicines optimisation system in one Clinical Commissioning Group in England. Five semi-structured interviews, four focus groups and one observation were conducted with a range of stakeholders. Consistent with a realist evaluation methodology, the analysis focused on exploring the links between context, mechanism and outcome to explain the ways the intervention might work, for whom and in what circumstances. Using the electronic medicines optimisation system could lead to a number of improved patient safety outcomes including pre-emptively reviewing patients at risk of adverse drug events. The effective use of the system depended upon engagement with the system, the flow of information between different health professionals centrally placed at the Clinical Commissioning Group and those locally placed at individual general practices, and upon variably adapting work practices to facilitate the use of the system. The use of the system was undermined by perceptions of ownership, lack of access, and lack of knowledge and awareness. The use of an electronic medicines optimisation system may improve medication safety in primary care settings by identifying those patients at risk of an adverse drug event. To fully realise the potential benefits for medication safety there needs to be better utilisation across primary care and with a wider range of stakeholders. Engaging with all potential stakeholders and users prior to implementation of such systems might allay perceptions that the system is owned centrally and increase knowledge of the potential benefits.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 144 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Belgium 1 <1%
Unknown 143 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 21 15%
Student > Master 18 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 16 11%
Student > Bachelor 14 10%
Other 9 6%
Other 30 21%
Unknown 36 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 32 22%
Nursing and Health Professions 22 15%
Social Sciences 14 10%
Business, Management and Accounting 8 6%
Psychology 5 3%
Other 21 15%
Unknown 42 29%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 10 August 2020.
All research outputs
#5,518,401
of 22,959,818 outputs
Outputs from BMC Health Services Research
#2,366
of 7,688 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#88,859
of 307,966 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Health Services Research
#48
of 150 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,959,818 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 75th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,688 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 307,966 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 150 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% of its contemporaries.