International Journal of Medical Informatics
Volume 79, Issue 6 , Pages 401-411 , June 2010

Nurses’ acceptance of Smart IV pump technology

  • Pascale Carayon

      Affiliations

    • Center for Quality and Productivity Improvement (CQPI), UW-Madison, Department of Industrial and Systems Engineering, UW-Madison, USA
    • Corresponding Author InformationCorresponding author at: Department of Industrial and Systems Engineering, Center for Quality and Productivity Improvement, University of Wisconsin-Madison, 3126 Engineering Centers Building, 1515 Engineering Drive, Madison, WI 53706-1609, USA. Tel.: +1 608 265 0503/3 2520; fax: +1 608 263 1425.
    • ,
  • Ann Schoofs Hundt

      Affiliations

    • Center for Quality and Productivity Improvement (CQPI), UW-Madison, USA
    • ,
  • Tosha B. Wetterneck

      Affiliations

    • Center for Quality and Productivity Improvement (CQPI), UW-Madison, Department of Medicine, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, USA

Received 2 December 2009 ,Revised 3 February 2010 ,Accepted 5 February 2010.

References 

  1. Institute for Safe Medication Practices, “Smart” infusion pumps join CPOE and bar coding as important ways to prevent medication errors, Retrieved on February 12, 2009, from http://www.ismp.org/Newsletters/acutecare/articles/20020207.asp.
  2. Taxis K. Who is responsible for the safety of infusion devices? It's high time for action!. Quality & Safety in Health Care. 2005;14:76
  3. Bates DW, Vanderveen T, Seger D, Yamaga C, Rothschild J. Variability in intravenous medication practices: implications for medication safety. Journal on Quality and Patient Safety. 2005;31:203–210
  4. Nuckols TK, Bower AG, Paddock SM, Hilborne LH, Wallace P, Rothschild JM, et al. Programmable infusion pumps in ICUs: an analysis of corresponding adverse drug events. Journal of General Internal Medicine. 2008;23(Suppl. 1):41–45
  5. Rothschild JM, Keohane CA, Cook EF, Orav EJ, Burdick E, Thompson S, et al. A controlled trial of smart infusion pumps to improve medication safety in critically ill patients. Critical Care Medicine. 2005;33:533–540
  6. Pedersen CA, Schneider PJ, Scheckelhoff DJ. ASHP national survey of pharmacy practice in hospital settings: dispensing and administration—2005. American Journal of Health-System Pharmacy. 2006;63:327–345
  7. Pedersen CA, Schneider PJ, Scheckelhoff DJ. ASHP national survey of pharmacy practice in hospital settings: dispensing and administration—2008. American Journal of Health-System Pharmacy. 2009;66:926–946
  8. ECRI . New perspectives on general-purpose infusion pumps. Advances in the technology, changes in our ratings. Health Devices. 2002;31:354–384
  9. Carayon P, Wetterneck TB, Hundt AS, Ozkaynac M, Ram P, DeSilvey J, et al. Observing nurse interaction with infusion pump technologies. Advances in Patient Safety: From Research to Implementation. 2005;2:349–364
  10. Wetterneck TB, Schroeder M, Skibinski K, Roberts TL, Carayon P. Challenges with the performance of failure mode and effects analysis in healthcare organizations. In: The Human Factors and Ergonomics Society  editors. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 48th Annual Meeting—2004. The Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, Santa Monica, CA. 2004;p. 1708–1712
  11. Birk S. Smart pumps need OK from clinicians. Materials Management in Health Care. 2008;17:38–40
  12. Nemeth C, Nunnally M, Bitan Y, Nunnally S, Cook RI. Between choice and chance: the role of human factors in acute care equipment decisions. Journal of Patient Safety. 2009;5:114–121
  13. Nunnally M, Nemeth CP, Brunetti V, Cook RI. Lost in menuspace: user interactions with complex medical devices. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics—Part A: Systems and Humans. 2004;34:736–742
  14. Zhang J, Patel VL, Johnson TR, Chung P, Turley JP. Evaluating and predicting patient safety for medical devices with integral information technology. Advances in Patient Safety: From Research to Implementation. 2005;2:323–336
  15. Lorenzi NM, Riley RT, Blyth AJ, Southon G, Dixon BJ. Antecedents of the people and organizational aspects of medical informatics: review of the literature. Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association. 1997;4:79–93
  16. Kaplan B. Addressing organizational issues into the evaluation of medical systems. Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association. 1997;4:94–101
  17. Staggers N, Kobus D. Comparing response time, errors, and satisfaction between text-based and graphical user interfaces during nursing order tasks. Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association. 2000;7:164–176
  18. Ammenwerth E, Mansmann U, Iller C, Eichstadter R. Factors accepting and affected by user acceptance of computer-based nursing documentation: results of a two-year study. Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association. 2003;10:69–84
  19. Brennan PF. A discipline by any other name. Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association. 2002;9:306–307
  20. Kaplan B, Brennan PF, Dowling AF, Friedman CP, Peel V. Toward an informatics research agenda: key people and organizational issues. Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association. 2001;8:235–241
  21. Staggers N, Kobus D, Brown C. Nurses’ evaluations of a novel design for an electronic medication administration record. Computers, Informatics, Nursing. 2007;25:67–75
  22. Davis FD. Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly. 1989;13:319–340
  23. Nielsen J. Usability Engineering. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Morgan Kaufmann; 1993;
  24. Davis FD. User acceptance of information technology: system characteristics, user perceptions and behavioral impacts. International Journal of Man-Machine Studies. 1993;38:475–487
  25. Timmons S. Nurses resisting information technology. Nursing Inquiry. 2003;10:257–269
  26. Handy J, Hunter I, Whitddett R. User acceptance of inter-organizational electronic medical records. Health Informatics Journal. 2001;7:103–107
  27. Mahmood MA, Burn JM, Gemoets LA, Jacquez C. Variables affecting information technology end-user satisfaction: a meta-analysis of the empirical literature. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies. 2000;52:751–771
  28. Karsh BT. Beyond usability: designing effective technology implementation systems to promote patient safety. Quality and Safety in Health Care. 2004;13:388–394
  29. Short D, Frischer M, Bashford J. Barriers to the adoption of computerised decision support systems in general practice consultations: a qualitative study of GPs’ perspectives. International Journal of Medical Informatics. 2004;73:357–362
  30. Darr A, Harrison MI, Shakked L, Shalom N. Physicians’ and nurses’ reactions to electronic medical records. Managerial and occupational implications. Journal of Health Organization and Management. 2003;17:349–359
  31. Carayon P, Karsh BT. Sociotechnical issues in the implementation of imaging technology. Behaviour and Information Technology. 2000;19:247–262
  32. Dillon TW, McDowell D, Salimian F, Conklin D. Perceived ease of use and usefulness of bedside-computer systems. Computer in Nursing. 1998;16:151–156
  33. Scarpa R, Smeltzer SC, Jasion B. Attitudes of nurses toward computerization: a replication. Computer in Nursing. 1992;10:72–80
  34. Chin JP, Diehl VA, Norman KL. Development of an instrument measuring user satisfaction of the human-computer interface. In: Proceedings of SIGCHI. New York, NY: ACM/SIGCHI; 1998;p. 213–218
  35. Bailey JE, Pearson SW. Development of a tool for measuring and analyzing computer user satisfaction. Management Science. 1983;29:530–545
  36. Keohane CA, Hayes J, Saniuk C, Rothschild JM, Bates DW. Intravenous medication safety and Smart infusion systems: lessons learned and future opportunities. Journal of Infusion Nursing. 2005;28:321–328
  37. Battles JB, Keyes MA. Technology and patient safety: a two-edged sword. Biomedical Instrumentation & Technology. 2002;36:84–88
  38. Koppel R, Metlay JP, Cohen A, Abaluck B, Localio AR, Kimmel SE, et al. Role of computerized physician order entry systems in facilitating medications errors. Journal of the American Medical Association. 2005;293:1197–1203
  39. Smith MJ, Carayon P. New technology, automation, and work organization: stress problems and improved technology implementation strategies. The International Journal of Human Factors in Manufacturing. 1995;5:99–116
  40. Lorenzi N, Riley RT. Organizational issues=change. International Journal of Medical Informatics. 2003;69:197–203
  41. Wetterneck TB, Skibinski KA, Roberts TL, Kleppin SM, Schroeder ME, Enloe M, et al. Using failure mode and effects analysis to plan implementation of smart IV pump technology. American Journal of Health-System Pharmacy. 2006;63:1528–1538
  42. Hundt AS, Carayon P, Wetterneck TB, Love T, Haack B, Schroeder M, et al. Evaluating design changes of a Smart IV pump. In:  Tartalgia R,  Bagnara S editor. Paper Presented at the Healthcare Systems Ergonomics and Patient Safety Conference, Florence, Italy, April 2005, Proceedings of the International Conference-HEPS 2005. Taylor & Francis, London, United Kingdom, Florence, Italy. 2005;p. 239–242
  43. McAlearney AS, Vrontos JJ, Schneider PJ, Curran CR, Czerwinski BS, Pedersen CA. Strategic work-arounds to accommodate new technology: the case of smart pumps in hospital care. Journal of Patient Safety. 2007;3:75–81

PII: S1386-5056(10)00040-7

doi: 10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2010.02.001

International Journal of Medical Informatics
Volume 79, Issue 6 , Pages 401-411 , June 2010

Article Tools

* Image Usage & Resolution