Posted By: Bill Crounse, MD | Jun 29th, 2007 @ 12:09 AM

A friend sent me a link to an article written for SearchCIO.com by senior editor, Kate Evans-Corriea. Ms. Evans-Corriea's article entitled "Age Does Matter" reflects on what she says was a common theme at Gartner's recent Symposium ITxpo. That theme is perhaps best captured in a quote from Gartner analyst, Tom Bittman, who says, "It's not the technology; It's not the process that's holding us back. It's the culture".

As I read the article, I couldn't help but think about a conversation I had just had with a colleague who currently serves as a hospital CIO. He expressed to me his total frustration with hospital culture and healthcare providers. In fact, he is so frustrated that after ten years on the job he is looking for another position; this time likely in another industry.

His hospital had recently purchased a very advanced surgical management system that included anesthesia scheduling and work-flow automation. The anesthesiologists at first welcomed these new tools, although one of the docs had initially pushed back because he had designed his own solution that he thought was a lot better than the vendor solution selected by the hospital.

Even so, after a few weeks using the new system, several of the older and most influential members of the anesthesia group simply proclaimed that they didn’t like what the hospital had purchased and would be going back to using their old paper processes. And, as my colleague noted, "that was that".

A similar scenario had recently played out in the radiology department. The mammography unit was asked to start using the hospital's digital PACS system. They prepared the docs for the fact that their productivity could initially fall by as much as 30 percent until they got used to the new tools and work-flow. The docs agreed to give it a try, but as soon as their productivity actually did take a nose-dive, they rebelled and refused to use the new system.

I know what you may be thinking. Screw the doctors! Tell them they have no choice but to use the new systems. As a doctor and a former hospital VP/CIO and CMIO, I know it's not that easy. Those doctors are the life blood of the hospital. It took years to recruit the physicians who run the mammography unit. And the anesthesiologists? They along with their powerful surgeon allies are responsible for most of the hospital’s profit margin.

The CIO also told me about his hospital's struggle to implement an electronic charting system in nursing. He said the VP of Nursing gives the initiative good lip service, but her first in command is a 50 year old nurse who has never worked anywhere else, and there’s a lot of passive-aggressive behavior going on in the rank and file. Since the nurses are all employees, you might think administrators could just lay down the law and mandate the use of the nursing documentation system. But you would be naïve to think that. The average age of nurses working at the hospital, especially as managers and unit leads, is 50-plus. There’s a huge nursing shortage with lots of vacancies in posted positions. They have a powerful union. It’s hard to tell them what to do.

I share this because it is so typical of the culture in healthcare, and not only here in America. It speaks volumes on the issue that Gartner is drawing to our attention; it isn’t so much about the technology as it is about the culture, and the need for more carefully orchestrated change management.

Of course some of these hassles will resolve as the “dinosaurs” retire. But based on what Gartner is saying the age and culture issue won't go away. Instead of “why must I use this computer instead of my paper” the argument will become “why must I use this (fill in the blank) instead of my computer"?

Bill Crounse, MD     Worldwide Health Director      Microsoft

Rating:
0
0

I think the cultural issues are very real, but the sad truth is that many IT systems created for use by health professionals are designed by IT staff who have no understanding of the basics of user experience design. This leads to systems that get in the way of healthcare delivery. The problems include but are not limited to:

- rigid system workflows that do not match the wide variation of real-world workflows, eg. in an ER setting; HIPAA security based on timeouts, requiring nurses to log in many times during a shift.

- poor hardware choices, such as low-quality displays that distort colors used as part of the UI semantics; tablet PCs that break, or require a special pen that gets lost, or spread infections, or have too short a battery life; or wireless LANs with dead zones in locations where the need for connectivity is critical.

- color choices that make the color-blind truly blind, or that obfuscate rather than highlighting crucial information.

If every health IT application was as usable as Word or Excel, I'd have less sympathy for the health professionals on the front line who get handed an application they didn't ask for. At this point in the evolution of health IT, what they get will likely have been written by engineers who are fundamentally clueless about the basics of cognitive psychology, organizational culture, and ergonomics. In terms of usability, commercial applications often do better than those written by in-house teams, but not always by much.

Jonathan Grudin of Microsoft Research wrote a great paper on the kinds of challenges one faces in creating and introducing complex applications: Groupware and Social Dynamics: Eight Challenges for Groupware Developers (http://research.microsoft.com/research/coet/Grudin/papers/CACM1994.pdf). If every software designer read and understood the implications of Grudin's paper, we'd have a better chance of overcoming the objections of those passive-aggressive end users.

I've met a lot of them over the years, and they really are a pain to deal with, there's no denying that. Even after you finally deliver a system that they like and are actually willing to use, the adaptive response sets in by week 2 and suddenly they realize you didn't add a feature they never told you about, that you could never have imagined if they didn't tell you about it, but that they must have by Tuesday. Oh, how I wish this were an exaggeration. 

Still, to the degree that their recalcitrance is actually justified, we can't afford to ignore or belittle their concerns. The best we who design their systems can do is to make software so good that all their complaints are irrational and/or unrealistic. At the end of the day, what they do in caring directly for patients is valuable, maybe more so than what we engineers do, and we should keep that in mind as we listen to their ranting.

Thanks for sharing your insights.  I couldn't have said it better.  If only all developers were as enlightened, maybe the electronic medical record would truly be mainstream by now.

Bill Crounse, MD