Barriers encountered with clinical data warehouses: Recommendations from a focus group.

Data reuse Data warehouse Guidelines Health data Recommendations

Journal

Computer methods and programs in biomedicine
ISSN: 1872-7565
Titre abrégé: Comput Methods Programs Biomed
Pays: Ireland
ID NLM: 8506513

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
01 Sep 2024
Historique:
received: 08 04 2024
revised: 22 07 2024
accepted: 29 08 2024
medline: 7 9 2024
pubmed: 7 9 2024
entrez: 6 9 2024
Statut: aheadofprint

Résumé

The increasing implementation and use of electronic health records over the last few decades has made a significant volume of clinical data being available. Over the past 20 years, hospitals have also adopted and implemented data warehouse technology to facilitate the reuse of administrative and clinical data for research. However, the implementation of clinical data warehouses encounters a set of barriers: ethical, legislative, technical, human and organizational. This paper proposes an overview of difficulties and barriers encountered during a clinical data warehouse (CDW) development and implementation project. We conducted a focus group at the 2023 Medical Informatics Europe Conference and invited professionals involved in the implementation of CDW. These experts described their CDW and the difficulties and barriers they encountered at each phase: (i) launching of the data warehouse project, (ii) implementing the data warehouse and (iii) using a data warehouse in routine operations. They were also asked to propose solutions they were able to implement to address the barriers previously reported. After synthesis and consensus, a total of 26 barriers were identified, 10 pertained to tasks, 5 to tools and technologies, 4 to persons, 4 to organization, and 3 to the external environment. To address these challenges, a set of 15 practical recommendations was offered, covering essential aspects such as governance, stakeholder engagement, interdisciplinary collaboration, and external expertise utilization. These recommendations serve as a valuable resource for healthcare institutions seeking to establish and optimize CDWs, offering a roadmap for leveraging clinical data for research, quality enhancement, and improved patient care.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE OBJECTIVE
The increasing implementation and use of electronic health records over the last few decades has made a significant volume of clinical data being available. Over the past 20 years, hospitals have also adopted and implemented data warehouse technology to facilitate the reuse of administrative and clinical data for research. However, the implementation of clinical data warehouses encounters a set of barriers: ethical, legislative, technical, human and organizational. This paper proposes an overview of difficulties and barriers encountered during a clinical data warehouse (CDW) development and implementation project.
METHODS METHODS
We conducted a focus group at the 2023 Medical Informatics Europe Conference and invited professionals involved in the implementation of CDW. These experts described their CDW and the difficulties and barriers they encountered at each phase: (i) launching of the data warehouse project, (ii) implementing the data warehouse and (iii) using a data warehouse in routine operations. They were also asked to propose solutions they were able to implement to address the barriers previously reported.
RESULTS RESULTS
After synthesis and consensus, a total of 26 barriers were identified, 10 pertained to tasks, 5 to tools and technologies, 4 to persons, 4 to organization, and 3 to the external environment. To address these challenges, a set of 15 practical recommendations was offered, covering essential aspects such as governance, stakeholder engagement, interdisciplinary collaboration, and external expertise utilization.
CONCLUSIONS CONCLUSIONS
These recommendations serve as a valuable resource for healthcare institutions seeking to establish and optimize CDWs, offering a roadmap for leveraging clinical data for research, quality enhancement, and improved patient care.

Identifiants

pubmed: 39241462
pii: S0169-2607(24)00397-3
doi: 10.1016/j.cmpb.2024.108404
pii:
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

108404

Informations de copyright

Copyright © 2024. Published by Elsevier B.V.

Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts

Declaration of competing interest The authors have no conflicts of interest to disclose.

Auteurs

Antoine Lamer (A)

Univ. Lille, CHU Lille, ULR 2694 - METRICS: Évaluation des Technologies de santé et des Pratiques médicales, F-59000, Lille, France; Univ. Lille, Faculté Ingénierie et Management de la Santé, F-59000, Lille, France; InterHop, Saint-Malo, France. Electronic address: antoine.lamer@univ.lille.fr.

Benjamin Popoff (B)

InterHop, Saint-Malo, France; Department of Anaesthesiology and Critical Care, Rouen University Hospital, Rouen, France.

Boris Delange (B)

InterHop, Saint-Malo, France; CHU Rennes, INSERM, LTSI-UMR 1099, Univ Rennes, 35000 Rennes, France.

Matthieu Doutreligne (M)

Haute Autorité de Santé, Mission Data, France.

Emmanuel Chazard (E)

Univ. Lille, CHU Lille, ULR 2694 - METRICS: Évaluation des Technologies de santé et des Pratiques médicales, F-59000, Lille, France.

Romaric Marcilly (R)

Univ. Lille, CHU Lille, ULR 2694 - METRICS: Évaluation des Technologies de santé et des Pratiques médicales, F-59000, Lille, France; Inserm, CIC-IT 1403, F-59000 Lille, France.

Sonia Priou (S)

Université Paris-Saclay, CentraleSupélec, Laboratoire Génie Industriel, France.

Paul Quindroit (P)

Univ. Lille, CHU Lille, ULR 2694 - METRICS: Évaluation des Technologies de santé et des Pratiques médicales, F-59000, Lille, France.

Classifications MeSH