Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.
Background: There is great enthusiasm for the potential of decision support tools embedded in the electronic medical record to improve antimicrobial use in hospitals. Yet they are often limited in their ability to change prescriber behavior. Analyzing these tools using an interactive sociotechnical approach (ISTA) can identify barriers and facilitators to the implementation of electronic decision support (EDS) in antimicrobial stewardship. Objective: To examine prescriber and antimicrobial steward perceptions of EDS using an ISTA approach in the preimplementation phase of an antimicrobial stewardship intervention. Methods: We conducted semistructured interviews with prescribers and stewards from 4 hospitals in 2 health systems in the context of a multicomponent intervention to improve the use of fluoroquinolones and extended-spectrum cephalosporins. Sites planned to implement various EDS elements including order sets, antimicrobial time outs, and audit with feedback stewardship notes in the medical record. Interviews elicited respondent perceptions about the planned intervention. Two analysts systematically coded transcripts using an ISTA framework in NVivo12 software. Results: Interviews with 64 respondents were conducted: 38 physicians, 7 nurses, 6 advanced practice providers, and 13 pharmacists. We identified 4 key sociotechnical interaction types likely to influence stewardship EDS implementation. First, EDS changes the communication patterns and practices of antimicrobial stewards in a way that improves efficiency but decreases vital social interaction with prescribers to facilitate behavior change. Second, there is a gap between what stewards envision for EDS and that which is possible to build in a timely manner by hospital information technology specialists. As a result, there is often a months- to years-long delay from proposal to implementation, which negatively affects intervention acceptance. Third, prescribers expressed great enthusiasm for stewardship EDS that would simplify their workload, allow them to complete important work tasks, and save time. They strongly objected to stewardship EDS that was disruptive without a compelling purpose or did not integrate smoothly with pre-existing technology infrastructure. Fourth, physician prescribers attributed social and emotional meaning to stewardship EDS, suggesting that these tools can undermine professional authority, autonomy, and confidence. Conclusions: Implementing stewardship EDS in a way that improves the use of antimicrobials while minimizing unintended negative consequences requires attention to the interplay between new EDS and an organization’s existing workflow, culture, social interactions and technologies. Implementing EDS in stewardship will require attention to these domains to realize the full potential of these tools and to avoid negative unintended consequences.
Funding: None
Disclosures: None
