Evaluation of the implementation of a nursing information system in a teaching hospital: the Professional Assessment Instrument (PAI)

Journal title RIV Rassegna Italiana di Valutazione
Author/s Serenella Stasi
Publishing Year 2019 Issue 2017/69
Language Italian Pages 21 P. 57-77 File size 583 KB
DOI 10.3280/RIV2017-069004
DOI is like a bar code for intellectual property: to have more infomation click here

Below, you can see the article first page

If you want to buy this article in PDF format, you can do it, following the instructions to buy download credits

Article preview

FrancoAngeli is member of Publishers International Linking Association, Inc (PILA), a not-for-profit association which run the CrossRef service enabling links to and from online scholarly content.

A clinical nursing information system named Professional Assessment Instrument (PAI) was developed to record nursing care in a hospital setting. The PAI is useful to identify patients’ needs (nursing diagnoses), nursing interventions and nursing-sensitive outcomes. The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of the PAI implementation in terms of improving patient safety, reducing health errors, improving efficiency. The evaluation was carried out through quantitative and qualitative methods. Questionnaires were administered before and after the PAI implementation and were examined through multidimensional analyses. Focus groups were conducted with PAI users and were analyzed through text mining.

Keywords: Electronic Health Records; Professional Assessment Instrument; Program Theory; Pluralist Approaches; PCA; Text Mining.

  1. Argyris C., (1992) On Organizational Learning, Cambridge, Oxford, Blackwell Publishers.
  2. Asan, P., Smith P.,D., & Montague E., (2014). More screen time, less face time – implications for EHR design in Journal of evaluation in clinical practice Vol 20 pp. 896-901
  3. Bolasco S., (2013). L’analisi automatica dei dati testuali. Roma: Carocci.
  4. Booth R.G., (2012). Examining the functionality of the DeLone and McLean information system success model as a framework for synthesis in nursing information and communication technology research. Computer Informatics Nursing, 30(6): 330-45.
  5. D’agostino F., Vellone E., Tontini F., Zega M.., Alvaro R., (2012). Sviluppo di un sistema informativo utilizzando un linguaggio infermieristico standard per la realizzazione di un Nursing Minimum Data Set. Professioni Infermieristiche, 65(2): 103-9.
  6. D’Agostino F., Zega M., Rocco G., Luzzi L., Vellone E., Alvaro R. (2013). Impact of a nursing information system in clinical practice: a longitudinal study project. Annali di Igiene, 25(4):329-41.
  7. Festinger L., (1957). A Theory of Cognitive Dissonance. California: Stanford University Press.
  8. Fraire M., Spagnuolo S., Stasi S., (2016). L’utilizzo dei big social data per la ricerca sociale: il caso della cittadinanza attiva in difesa del territorio in Sociologia e Ricerca sociale n 109 ISSN 1121-1148, ISSNe 1971-8446 DOI: 10.3280/SR2016-10901
  9. Fraire M., Stasi S., (2014). La misurazione degli aspetti non cognitivi nell’apprendimento degli studenti tramite indici sintetici. Risultati di un’indagine svolta nell’Università Sapienza di Roma (Assessment of Students’ Non Cognitive Factors in Learning by Index) In Sociologia e ricerca sociale n.104
  10. Gephart S., Carrington J.M., Finley B. (2015). A Systematic Review of Nurses' Experiences With Unintended Consequences When Using the Electronic Health Record. Nursing Administration Quarterly, 39(4): 345-56. DOI: 10.1097/NAQ.000000000000011
  11. Herdman H. (2014) Nursing Diagnoses: Definitions and Classification 2015-2017. Wiley-Blackwell: Oxford.
  12. Kaplan B. (1997). Addressing organizational issues into the evaluation of medical systems. Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association, 4(2): 94-101.
  13. Kaplan B., Duchon D. (1988). Combining qualitative and quantitative methods in information systems research: A case study. MIS Quarterly, 12 (4): 571-86.
  14. Kaplan B., Harris-Salamone K.D. (2009). Health IT success and failure: recommendations from literature and an AMIA workshop. Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association, 16 (3): 291-9.
  15. Ministero della Sanità. Decreto 14 settembre 1994, n. 739. Regolamento concernente l'individuazione della figura e del relativo profilo professionale dell'infermiere. -- Disponibile su: http://www.gazzettaufficiale.it/eli/id/1995/01/09/095G0001/sg;jsessionid=SHLl8ChHijzbRJ8XmSPO9Q__.ntc-as2-guri2b. Ultimo accesso 14/09/2017
  16. Nguyen L., Bellucci E., & Nguyen L.T., (2014). Electronic health records implementation: an evaluation of information system impact and contingency factors. International Journal of Medical Informatics, 83(11): 779-96.
  17. Pawson R., Tilley N., (1997). Realistic Evaluation. London: Sage.
  18. Perrin B., (1998). Effective Use and Misuse of Performance measurement. American Journal of Evaluation, 19(3): 367-379. DOI: 10.1016/S1098-2140(99)80218-
  19. Perrin B., (2007). Toward a new view of accountability in Bemelmans
  20. Videc M.,L., Lonsdale J., Perrin B., (a cura di) Making Accountability Work, Transaction Publisher New Brunswick NJ Reis Z.S.N., Maia T.A., Marcolino M.S., Becerra-Posada F., Novillo-Ortiz D., Ribeiro A.L.P. (2017). Is There Evidence of Cost Benefits of Electronic Medical Records, Standards, or Interoperability in Hospital Information Systems? Overview of Systematic Reviews. JMIR Medical Informatics, 29;5(3):e26.
  21. Rosenbloom S.T., Miller R.A., Johnson K.B., Elkin P.L. & Brown S.H. (2006). Interface terminologies: facilitating direct entry of clinical data into electronic health record systems. Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association, 13(3), 277–288.
  22. Snowden A., Kolb H. (2017). Two years of unintended consequences: introducing an electronic health record system in a hospice in Scotland. Journal of Clinical Nursing, 26(9-10):1414-1427.
  23. Stame N., (2007). Classici della Valutazione. Milano: FrancoAngeli.
  24. Stame N., (2016). Valutazione pluralista. Milano: FrancoAngeli.
  25. Stockton A.H., Verhey M.P. (1995). A psychometric examination of the Stronge-Brodt Nurses’ Attitudes Toward Computers Questionnaire. Computer Nursing, 13(3): 109-13.
  26. Torrigiani C., 2009, “Partecipazione e valutazione partecipata”, in Palumbo M., Torrigiani C. (a cura di), La partecipazione tra ricerca e valutazione, Franco Angeli, Milano, pp. 112-134.
  27. Urquhart C., Currell R., Grant M.J., Hardiker NR. (2009). Nursing record systems: effects on nursing practice and healthcare outcomes. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, 21 (1).
  28. Weiss C., (1995). Nothing as Pratical as Good Theory, in Connel J., Kubisch A., Schorr L.,B., Weiss C., (a cura di) New Approaches to Evaluation Community Initiatives, Aspen Institute New York
  29. Weiss C., (1997). Have we Learned Anything New About the Use of Evaluation? In American Journal of Evaluation, vol 19 n.1, copyright 1998 by Sage.
  30. Zega M., Bowles K.H., Vellone E., De Marinis M.G., Rocco G., D’Agostino F., Alvaro R., (2014). Development and validation of a computerized assessment form to support nursing diagnosis. International Journal of Nursing Knowledge, 25(1):22-9. DOI: 10.1111/2047-3095.12008

Serenella Stasi, Valutazione dell’implementazione di un sistema informativo infermieristico in un ospedale universitario: il progetto Professional Assessment Instrument (PAI) in "RIV Rassegna Italiana di Valutazione" 69/2017, pp 57-77, DOI: 10.3280/RIV2017-069004