Maintenance Notice

Due to necessary scheduled maintenance, the JMIR Publications website will be unavailable from Wednesday, July 01, 2020 at 8:00 PM to 10:00 PM EST. We apologize in advance for any inconvenience this may cause you.

Who will be affected?

Accepted for/Published in: JMIR mHealth and uHealth

Date Submitted: Apr 20, 2020
Open Peer Review Period: Apr 20, 2020 - Jun 15, 2020
Date Accepted: Feb 22, 2021
Date Submitted to PubMed: Feb 24, 2021
(closed for review but you can still tweet)

The final, peer-reviewed published version of this preprint can be found here:

Using a Clinical Workflow Analysis to Enhance eHealth Implementation Planning: Tutorial and Case Study

Staras SA, Tauscher JS, Rich N, Samarah E, Thompson LA, Vinson MM, Muszynski MJ, Shenkman EA

Using a Clinical Workflow Analysis to Enhance eHealth Implementation Planning: Tutorial and Case Study

JMIR Mhealth Uhealth 2021;9(3):e18534

DOI: 10.2196/18534

PMID: 33626016

PMCID: 8047797

Using clinical workflow analysis to enhance eHealth implementation planning: A tutorial and case study

  • Stephanie AS Staras; 
  • Justin S Tauscher; 
  • Natalie Rich; 
  • Esaa Samarah; 
  • Lindsay A Thompson; 
  • Michelle M Vinson; 
  • Michael J Muszynski; 
  • Elizabeth A Shenkman

ABSTRACT

Background:

To help guide implementation of eHealth interventions, we report a simple and easy-to-follow method to conduct a clinical workflow analysis before eHealth implementation including an example of our experience.

Objective:

This study aimed to analyze workflow before eHealth implementation to determine the best timing and personnel for implementation.

Methods:

Following an example from our own work, we describe the steps to create a planned implementation workflow of an eHealth application in primary care clinics. We describe and provide examples for four steps: a) identification of discrete workflow components, b) selection of appropriate measurement tools, c) direct observation of clinical workflow, and d) stakeholder engaged data analysis and synthesis.

Results:

Between August 2016 and March 2017, we observed 13 visits of 11- or 12-year-olds at four diverse Florida pediatric or family medicine clinics. We created a flowchart to display each clinic’s workflow. Across clinics, the general workflow process and patient flow was similar and allowed approximately 20-minutes for patients to complete intervention tasks prior to seeing their doctor. During semi-structured interviews, lead clinicians and medical staff at each clinic reviewed the flowchart and expressed that it accurately captured their work. Three of the four clinics suggested nearly identical implementation strategies for the eHealth application. By conducting workflow analysis prior to implementation of an eHealth intervention, we identified specific timing, staffing, and management processes for implementation, potential barriers, and increased stakeholder buy-in.

Conclusions:

The easy-to-follow steps presented will help investigators plan implementation of new eHealth interventions in primary healthcare settings. Conducting a prospective workflow study allows for observation-based planning, identifying potential pitfalls, and increasing stakeholder buy-in.


 Citation

Please cite as:

Staras SA, Tauscher JS, Rich N, Samarah E, Thompson LA, Vinson MM, Muszynski MJ, Shenkman EA

Using a Clinical Workflow Analysis to Enhance eHealth Implementation Planning: Tutorial and Case Study

JMIR Mhealth Uhealth 2021;9(3):e18534

DOI: 10.2196/18534

PMID: 33626016

PMCID: 8047797

Download PDF


Request queued. Please wait while the file is being generated. It may take some time.

© The authors. All rights reserved. This is a privileged document currently under peer-review/community review (or an accepted/rejected manuscript). Authors have provided JMIR Publications with an exclusive license to publish this preprint on it's website for review and ahead-of-print citation purposes only. While the final peer-reviewed paper may be licensed under a cc-by license on publication, at this stage authors and publisher expressively prohibit redistribution of this draft paper other than for review purposes.