Health Information Technology Safety Research Articles

Implementation of a health information technology safety classification system in the Veterans Health Administration's Informatics Patient Safety Office.

Implement the 5-type health information technology (HIT) patient safety concern classification system for HIT patient safety issues reported to the Veterans Health Administration's Informatics Patient Safety Office. A team of informatics safety analysts retrospectively classified 1year of HIT patient safety issues by type of HIT patient safety concern using consensus discussions. The processes established during retrospective classification were then applied to incoming HIT safety issues moving forward. Of 140 issues retrospectively reviewed, 124 met the classification criteria. The majority were HIT failures (eg, software defects) (33.1%) or configuration and implementation problems (29.8%). Unmet user needs and external system interactions accounted for 20.2% and 10.5%, respectively. Absence of HIT safety features accounted for 2.4% of issues, and 4% did not have enough information to classify. The 5-type HIT safety concern classification framework generated actionable categories helping organizations effectively respond to HIT patient safety risks.

Clinical Informatics Team Members' Perspectives on Health Information Technology Safety After Experiential Learning and Safety Process Development: Qualitative Descriptive Study.

Although intended to support improvement, the rapid adoption and evolution of technologies in health care can also bring about unintended consequences related to safety. In this project, an embedded researcher with expertise in patient safety and clinical education worked with a clinical informatics team to examine safety and harm related to health information technologies (HITs) in primary and community care settings. The clinical informatics team participated in learning activities around relevant topics (eg, human factors, high reliability organizations, and sociotechnical systems) and cocreated a process to address safety events related to technology (ie, safety huddles and sociotechnical analysis of safety events). This study aimed to explore clinical informaticians' experiences of incorporating safety practices into their work. We used a qualitative descriptive design and conducted web-based focus groups with clinical informaticians. Thematic analysis was used to analyze the data. A total of 10 informants participated. Barriers to addressing safety and harm in their context included limited prior knowledge of HIT safety, previous assumptions and perspectives, competing priorities and organizational barriers, difficulty with the reporting system and processes, and a limited number of reports for learning. Enablers to promoting safety and mitigating harm included participating in learning sessions, gaining experience analyzing reported events, participating in safety huddles, and role modeling and leadership from the embedded researcher. Individual outcomes included increased ownership and interest in HIT safety, the development of a sociotechnical systems perspective, thinking differently about safety, and increased consideration for user perspectives. Team outcomes included enhanced communication within the team, using safety events to inform future work and strategic planning, and an overall promotion of a culture of safety. As HITs are integrated into care delivery, it is important for clinical informaticians to recognize the risks related to safety. Experiential learning activities, including reviewing safety event reports and participating in safety huddles, were identified as particularly impactful. An HIT safety learning initiative is a feasible approach for clinical informaticians to become more knowledgeable and engaged in HIT safety issues in their work.

Reporting Outcomes of Pediatric Intensive Care Unit Patients to Referring Physicians via an Electronic Health Record-Based Feedback System.

Many critically ill children are initially evaluated in front-line settings by clinicians with variable pediatric training before they are transferred to a pediatric intensive care unit (PICU). Because clinicians learn from past performance, communicating outcomes of patients back to front-line clinicians who provide pediatric emergency care could be valuable; however, referring clinicians do not consistently receive this important feedback. Our aim was to determine the feasibility, usability, and clinical relevance of a semiautomated electronic health record (EHR)-supported system developed at a single institution to deliver timely and relevant PICU patient outcome feedback to referring emergency department (ED) physicians. Guided by the Health Information Technology Safety Framework, we iteratively designed, implemented, and evaluated a semiautomated electronic feedback system leveraging the EHR in one institution. After conducting interviews and focus groups with stakeholders to understand the PICU-ED health care work system, we designed the EHR-supported feedback system by translating stakeholder, organizational, and usability objectives into feedback process and report requirements. Over 6 months, we completed three cycles of implementation and evaluation, wherein we analyzed EHR access logs, reviewed feedback reports sent, performed usability testing, and conducted physician interviews to determine the system's feasibility, usability, and clinical relevance. The EHR-supported feedback process is feasible with timely delivery and receipt of feedback reports. Usability testing revealed excellent Systems Usability Scale scores. According to physicians, the process was well-integrated into their clinical workflows and conferred minimal additional workload. Physicians also indicated that delivering and receiving consistent feedback was relevant to their clinical practice. An EHR-supported system to deliver timely and relevant PICU patient outcome feedback to referring ED physicians was feasible, usable, and important to physicians. Future work is needed to evaluate impact on clinical practice and patient outcomes and to investigate applicability to other clinical settings involved in similar care transitions.

Assessment of Health Information Technology–Related Outpatient Diagnostic Delays in the US Veterans Affairs Health Care System

Diagnostic delay in the outpatient setting is an emerging safety priority that health information technology (HIT) should help address. However, diagnostic delays have persisted, and new safety concerns associated with the use of HIT have emerged. To analyze HIT-related outpatient diagnostic delays within a large, integrated health care system. This cohort study involved qualitative content analysis of safety concerns identified in aggregated root cause analysis (RCA) data related to HIT and outpatient diagnostic delays. The setting was the US Department of Veterans Affairs using all RCAs submitted to the Veterans Affairs (VA) National Center for Patient Safety from January 1, 2013, to July 31, 2018. Common themes associated with the role of HIT-related safety concerns were identified and categorized according to the Health IT Safety framework for measuring, monitoring, and improving HIT safety. This framework includes 3 related domains (ie, safe HIT, safe use of HIT, and using HIT to improve safety) situated within an 8-dimensional sociotechnical model accounting for interacting technical and nontechnical variables associated with safety. Hence, themes identified enhanced understanding of the sociotechnical context and domain of HIT safety involved. Of 214 RCAs categorized by the terms delay and outpatient submitted during the study period, 88 were identified as involving diagnostic delays and HIT, from which 172 unique HIT-related safety concerns were extracted (mean [SD], 1.97 [1.53] per RCA). Most safety concerns (82.6% [142 of 172]) involved problems with safe use of HIT, predominantly sociotechnical factors associated with people, workflow and communication, and a poorly designed human-computer interface. Fewer safety concerns involved problems with safe HIT (14.5% [25 of 172]) or using HIT to improve safety (0.3% [5 of 172]). The following 5 key high-risk areas for diagnostic delays emerged: managing electronic health record inbox notifications and communication, clinicians gathering key diagnostic information, technical problems, data entry problems, and failure of a system to track test results. This qualitative study of a national RCA data set suggests that interventions to reduce outpatient diagnostic delays could aim to improve test result management, interoperability, data visualization, and order entry, as well as to decrease information overload.

Improving the safety of health information technology requires shared responsibility: It is time we all step up

In 2011, an Institute of Medicine report on health information technology (IT) and patient safety highlighted that building health-IT for safer use is a shared responsibility between key stakeholders including: “vendors, care providers, healthcare organizations, health-IT departments, and public and private agencies”. Use of electronic health records (EHRs) involves all these stakeholders, but they often have conflicting priorities and requirements. Since 2011, the concept of shared responsibility has gained little traction and EHR developers and users continue to attribute the substantial, long list of problems to each other. In this article, we discuss how these key stakeholders have complementary roles in improving EHR safety and must share responsibility to improve the current state of EHR use. We use real-world safety examples and outline a comprehensive shared responsibility approach to help guide development of future rules, regulations, and standards for EHR usability, interoperability and security as outlined in the 21st Century Cures Act. This approach clearly defines the responsibilities of each party and helps create appropriate measures for success. National and international policymakers must facilitate the local organizational and socio-political climate to stimulate the adoption of shared responsibility principles. When all major stakeholders are sharing responsibility, we will be more likely to usher in a new age of progress and innovation related to health IT.

Who Watches the Watchers. Working Towards Safety for EHR Knowledge Resources.

SummaryThe rise in the use of electronic health records (EHRs) and associated resources over the last decade is leading to the end of the paper medical record and all the risks associated with the use of a paper chart. However, there has not been a concomitant creation of a systematic oversight body that is specifically charged with ensuring the public’s safety through the use of EHR knowledge resource tools or EHRs themselves. We recommend the formation a Health Information Technology Safety Center. Such a center could collect error reports, review EHRs and the knowledge resources incorporated within them, and investigate particularly challenging EHR-related safety issues at participating health care delivery organizations. Safety issues could be identified, corrected, and the solutions widely disseminated. Citation: Labkoff SE, Sittig DF. Who watches the watchers: working towards safety for EHR knowledge resources. Appl Clin Inform 2017; 8: 680–685 https://doi.org/10.4338/ACI-2017-02-IE-0032

Problems with health information technology and their effects on care delivery and patient outcomes: a systematic review.

To systematically review studies reporting problems with information technology (IT) in health care and their effects on care delivery and patient outcomes. We searched bibliographic databases including Scopus, PubMed, and Science Citation Index Expanded from January 2004 to December 2015 for studies reporting problems with IT and their effects. A framework called the information value chain, which connects technology use to final outcome, was used to assess how IT problems affect user interaction, information receipt, decision-making, care processes, and patient outcomes. The review was conducted in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement. Of the 34 studies identified, the majority ( n = 14, 41%) were analyses of incidents reported from 6 countries. There were 7 descriptive studies, 9 ethnographic studies, and 4 case reports. The types of IT problems were similar to those described in earlier classifications of safety problems associated with health IT. The frequency, scale, and severity of IT problems were not adequately captured within these studies. Use errors and poor user interfaces interfered with the receipt of information and led to errors of commission when making decisions. Clinical errors involving medications were well characterized. Issues with system functionality, including poor user interfaces and fragmented displays, delayed care delivery. Issues with system access, system configuration, and software updates also delayed care. In 18 studies (53%), IT problems were linked to patient harm and death. Near-miss events were reported in 10 studies (29%). The research evidence describing problems with health IT remains largely qualitative, and many opportunities remain to systematically study and quantify risks and benefits with regard to patient safety. The information value chain, when used in conjunction with existing classifications for health IT safety problems, can enhance measurement and should facilitate identification of the most significant risks to patient safety.

Integrating Health Information Technology Safety into Nursing Informatics Competencies.

Nursing informatics competencies are constantly changing in response to advances in the health information technology (HIT) industry and research emerging from the fields of nursing and health informatics. In this paper we build off the work of Staggers and colleagues in defining nursing informatics competencies at five levels: the beginning nurse, the experienced nurse, the nursing informatics specialist, the nursing informatics innovator and the nursing informatics researcher in the area of HIT safety. The work represents a significant contribution to the literature in the area of nursing informatics competency development as it extends nursing informatics competencies to include those focused on the area of technology-induced errors and HIT safety.

Methods for Addressing Technology-induced Errors: The Current State.

The objectives of this paper are to review and discuss the methods that are being used internationally to report on, mitigate, and eliminate technology-induced errors. The IMIA Working Group for Health Informatics for Patient Safety worked together to review and synthesize some of the main methods and approaches associated with technology- induced error reporting, reduction, and mitigation. The work involved a review of the evidence-based literature as well as guideline publications specific to health informatics. The paper presents a rich overview of current approaches, issues, and methods associated with: (1) safe HIT design, (2) safe HIT implementation, (3) reporting on technology-induced errors, (4) technology-induced error analysis, and (5) health information technology (HIT) risk management. The work is based on research from around the world. Internationally, researchers have been developing methods that can be used to identify, report on, mitigate, and eliminate technology-induced errors. Although there remain issues and challenges associated with the methodologies, they have been shown to improve the quality and safety of HIT. Since the first publications documenting technology-induced errors in healthcare in 2005, we have seen in a short 10 years researchers develop ways of identifying and addressing these types of errors. We have also seen organizations begin to use these approaches. Knowledge has been translated into practice in a short ten years whereas the norm for other research areas is of 20 years.

A SYSTEMATIC LITERATURE REVIEW ON SAFE HEALTH INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY USE BEHAVIOUR

The implementation of health information technology (IT) is one of the strategy to improve patient safety due to medical errors. Nevertheless, inappropriate use of health IT may have serious consequences to the quality of care and patient safety. Most of the previous studies have been focused on the sociotechnical factors contributed to health IT related errors. Little focus has been given on the use behavior that influence the safety of health IT adoption. In order to address this gap, this study investigates the use behavior that influence the safety of health IT adoption. Systematic literature review was conducted to identify articles pertinent to safety of health IT. Science Direct, Medline, EMBASE, and CINAHL database were searched for reviews relevance articles. A total of 23 full articles were reviewed to extract use behavior that influence the safety of health IT adoption. Workarounds, adhere to procedure, vigilant action, and copy and paste behavior were discerned as the significance use behavior that influence health IT safety adoption. This study may be of significance in providing useful information on how to safely practice health IT adoption.

A Cognitive Analysis of Informatics Patient Safety Issues Reported Within the Veterans Health Administration

The goal of the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) Informatics Patient Safety program (IPS) is to improve the safety of Health Information Technology (HIT) products. To support the analysis of patient safety issues, a set of categories was developed for Human-HIT interaction errors that can occur as users conduct their work (Chapman, Taylor, and Wood, 2012). Here we describe the categorization of 97 patient safety issues reported to IPS between October 1st 2013 and September 30th 2014. We highlight: (1) how categorization can contribute to the risk assessment process, (2) which error types were most frequently found, and (3) how these results suggest the categories and our issue analysis process can be refined.

Patient safety goals for the proposed Federal Health Information Technology Safety Center.

The Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology is expected to oversee creation of a Health Information Technology (HIT) Safety Center. While its functions are still being defined, the center is envisioned as a public-private entity focusing on promotion of HIT related patient safety. We propose that the HIT Safety Center leverages its unique position to work with key administrative and policy stakeholders, healthcare organizations (HCOs), and HIT vendors to achieve four goals: (1) facilitate creation of a nationwide 'post-marketing' surveillance system to monitor HIT related safety events; (2) develop methods and governance structures to support investigation of major HIT related safety events; (3) create the infrastructure and methods needed to carry out random assessments of HIT related safety in complex HCOs; and (4) advocate for HIT safety with government and private entities. The convening ability of a federally supported HIT Safety Center could be critically important to our transformation to a safe and effective HIT enabled healthcare system.

Using a medical simulation center as an electronic health record usability laboratory

Usability testing is increasingly being recognized as a way to increase the usability and safety of health information technology (HIT). Medical simulation centers can serve as testing environments for HIT usability studies. We integrated the quality assurance version of our emergency department (ED) electronic health record (EHR) into our medical simulation center and piloted a clinical care scenario in which emergency medicine resident physicians evaluated a simulated ED patient and documented electronically using the ED EHR. Meticulous planning and close collaboration with expert simulation staff was important for designing test scenarios, pilot testing, and running the sessions. Similarly, working with information systems teams was important for integration of the EHR. Electronic tools are needed to facilitate entry of fictitious clinical results while the simulation scenario is unfolding. EHRs can be successfully integrated into existing simulation centers, which may provide realistic environments for usability testing, training, and evaluation of human-computer interactions.

Health information technology safety: the perfect storms.

Health information technology safety: the perfect storms.

Safe Use of Electronic Health Records and Health Information Technology Systems

We will provide a context to health information technology systems (HIT) safety hazards discussions, describe how electronic health record-computer prescriber order entry (EHR-CPOE) simulation has already identified unrecognized hazards in HIT on a national scale, helping make EHR-CPOE systems safer, and we make the case for all stakeholders to leverage proven methods and teams in HIT performance verification. A national poll of safety, quality improvement, and health-care administrative leaders identified health information technology safety as the hazard of greatest concern for 2013. Quality, HIT, and safety leaders are very concerned about technology performance risks as addressed in the Health Information Technology and Patient Safety report of the Institute of Medicine; and these are being addressed by the Office of the National Coordinator of HIT of the U.S. Dept. of Human Services in their proposed plans. We describe the evolution of postdeployment testing of HIT performance, including the results of national deployment of Texas Medical Institute of Technology's electronic health record computer prescriber order entry (TMIT EHR-CPOE) Flight Simulator verification test that is addressed in these 2 reports, and the safety hazards of concern to leaders. A global webinar for health-care leaders addressed the top patient safety hazards in the areas of leadership, practices, and technologies. A poll of 76 of the 221 organizations participating in the webinar revealed that HIT hazards were the participants' greatest concern of all 30 hazards presented. Of those polled, 89% rated HIT patient/data mismatches in EHRs and HIT systems as a 9 or 10 on a scale of 1 to 10 as a hazard of great concern. Review of a key study of postdeployment testing of the safety performance of operational EHR systems with CPOE implemented in 62 hospitals, using the TMIT EHR-CPOE simulation tool, showed that only 53% of the medication orders that could have resulted in fatalities were detected. The study also showed significant variability in the performance of specific EHR vendor systems, with the same vendor product scoring as high as a 75% detection score in one health-care organization, and the same vendor system scoring below 10% in another health-care organization. HIT safety hazards should be taken very seriously, and the need for proven, robust, and regular postdeployment performance verification measurement of EHR system operations in every health-care organization is critical to ensure that these systems are safe for every patient. The TMIT EHR-CPOE flight simulator is a well-tested and scalable tool that can be used to identify performance gaps in EHR and other HIT systems. It is critical that suppliers, providers, and purchasers of health-care partner with HIT stakeholders and leverage the existing body of work, as well as expert teams and collaborative networks to make care safer; and public-private partnerships to accelerate safety in HIT. A global collaborative is already underway incorporating a "trust but verify" philosophy.

A Call for Standardized Metrics to Assess Health IT Impact on Medication Safety

To the Editor: It has been repeatedly affirmed that increased technology use in health care is a cost-effective means of providing higher quality patient care. One main driver for expanded health information technology (IT) is the belief that it increases the safety of the medication use process. Through the use of substantial public and private investment, particularly the Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health (HITECH) Act, as part of the 2009 Recovery Act, which amounted to $25.9 billion, this viewpoint has been validated.1 Furthermore, a 2011 American Society of Health-System Pharmacists (ASHP) national survey of hospital pharmacy practice that focused on technology utilization related to medication dispensing and administration found an increase in the level of adoption of various technologies such as computerized prescriber order entry (CPOE), barcode medication administration (BCMA), and smart infusion pumps.2 Health system administrators are left to devise their own metrics to determine whether their investment in such technologies is money well spent. We recently conducted a review of the literature to analyze whether there was any uniformity among health systems in choosing appropriate metrics to assess the impact of health IT implementation on medication safety-related outcomes. Using predetermined PubMed search criteria, we evaluated 43 articles, and, as expected, we observed broad diversity with 34 different metrics identified. About 59% of these metrics were utilized in just 2 or fewer articles, further emphasizing the variance observed in the literature review. The measurement of voluntarily reported medication errors was most commonly utilized, but this metric is inherently unreliable due to the difficulty in quantifying and qualifying such errors. Many confounding factors exist, and literature suggests that some types of health IT may introduce new errors, all leading to concerns whether this particular metric is the most accurate to use. Overall, our research suggests a lack of concordance as to how best to measure the impact of health IT on medication safety. What can be done to create a safer and more accurate method for assessing medication safety? The Institute of Medicine (IOM) has previously called for a uniform standard of metrics that would more easily determine the effectiveness of health IT on medication safety outcomes. In a November 2011 report titled Health IT and Patient Safety: Building Safer Systems for Better Care, the agency called on the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) to promote the “development of new measures for reliably assessing the current state of health IT safety and monitoring for improvements.”3 The IOM urged HHS to “fund a new Health IT Safety Council, within an existing voluntary consensus standards organization.”3 The purpose of this council would be to develop criteria to judge the safe use of health IT and to evaluate how it is used to enhance safety.3 To date, this council has not yet been formed. Although there have been increments of advancement in the development of standards in measuring the impact of health IT on medication safety, it is clear there is more to accomplish in developing a framework by which such implementation can be assessed. A consensus of all major health care stakeholders is needed to create a uniform method to assess how health IT is impacting safety. Ultimately, there should be further development of validated metrics that more clearly demonstrate whether the adoption of health IT, which can cost millions of dollars, is cost-effective and is indeed improving the safety of the medication-use process.

From Usability Testing to Clinical Simulations: Bringing Context into the Design and Evaluation of Usable and Safe Health Information Technologies

The objective of this paper is to explore human factors approaches to understanding the use of health information technology (HIT) by extending usability engineering approaches to include analysis of the impact of clinical context through use of clinical simulations. Methods discussed are considered on a continuum from traditional laboratory-based usability testing to clinical simulations. Clinical simulations can be conducted in a simulation laboratory and they can also be conducted in real-world settings. The clinical simulation approach attempts to bring the dimension of clinical context into stronger focus. This involves testing of systems with representative users doing representative tasks, in representative settings/environments. Application of methods where realistic clinical scenarios are used to drive the study of users interacting with systems under realistic conditions and settings can lead to identification of problems and issues with systems that may not be detected using traditional usability engineering methods. In conducting such studies, careful consideration is needed in creating ecologically valid test scenarios. The evidence obtained from such evaluation can be used to improve both the usability and safety of HIT. In addition, recent work has shown that clinical simulations, in particular those conducted in-situ, can lead to considerable benefits when compared to the costs of running such studies. In order to bring context of use into the testing of HIT, clinical simulation, involving observing representative users carrying out tasks in representative settings, holds considerable promise.

Usability Methods for Ensuring Health Information Technology Safety: Evidence-Based Approaches Contribution of the IMIA Working Group Health Informatics for Patient Safety

Issues related to lack of system usability and potential safety hazards continue to be reported in the health information technology (HIT) literature. Usability engineering methods are increasingly used to ensure improved system usability and they are also beginning to be applied more widely for ensuring the safety of HIT applications. These methods are being used in the design and implementation of many HIT systems. In this paper we describe evidence-based approaches to applying usability engineering methods. A multi-phased approach to ensuring system usability and safety in healthcare is described. Usability inspection methods are first described including the development of evidence-based safety heuristics for HIT. Laboratory-based usability testing is then conducted under artificial conditions to test if a system has any base level usability problems that need to be corrected. Usability problems that are detected are corrected and then a new phase is initiated where the system is tested under more realistic conditions using clinical simulations. This phase may involve testing the system with simulated patients. Finally, an additional phase may be conducted, involving a naturalistic study of system use under real-world clinical conditions. The methods described have been employed in the analysis of the usability and safety of a wide range of HIT applications, including electronic health record systems, decision support systems and consumer health applications. It has been found that at least usability inspection and usability testing should be applied prior to the widespread release of HIT. However, wherever possible, additional layers of testing involving clinical simulations and a naturalistic evaluation will likely detect usability and safety issues that may not otherwise be detected prior to widespread system release. The framework presented in the paper can be applied in order to develop more usable and safer HIT, based on multiple layers of evidence.

Evolution of Human Factors Research and Studies of Health Information Technologies: The Role of Patient Safety

The objective of this survey paper is to present and explain the impact of recent regulations and patient safety initiatives (EU, US and Canada) on Human Factors (HF)/Usability studies and research focusing on Health Information Technology (HIT). The authors have selected the most prominent of these recent regulations and initiatives, which rely on validated HF and usability methods and concepts and aim at enhancing the specific process of identification and prevention of technology-induced errors throughout the lifecycle of HIT. The analysis highlights several points of consensus: 1) safety initiatives or regulations applicable to Medical Devices (MD) tend to extend to HIT, 2) Usability is considered a fundamental dimension of HIT safety, 3) HF/Usability methods and the overall Human Centred Design (HCD) approach are considered efficient solutions to ensure the design of safe and usable HIT. However, it appears that MD manufacturers, and a fortiori HIT designers and developers are still far from being able to routinely apply HCD to their products. On the research side, we need to analyze manufacturers' difficulties with the application of the HCD process and imposed standards. For each given category of HIT, we need to identify the fundamental usability dimensions and design principles likely to impact patient safety independently of workplace settings or organizations. These should be described in terms of usability flaws, corresponding usage problems experienced by users and related outcomes. This approach requires good quality and well structured reporting of Human Factors / Usability research studies on HIT.

National efforts to improve health information system safety in Canada, the United States of America and England

ObjectiveIn this paper we review progress as well as challenges encountered in Canada, the United States and England with regard to ensuring safety of health information technology. MethodA review of major programs and initiatives for ensuring safety of health information technology in the three countries was conducted. Published literature and Web resources from national programs were reviewed for relevant information. ResultsIt was found that in all three countries the issue of technology-induced error has been recognized as being of critical importance. The three countries have developed approaches for dealing with the issue that have some commonalities; however, they are at varying different stages of maturity, with England having the longest standing and most well developed safety programs, while Canada and the United States are at earlier stages. The types of approaches employed have included work on developing standards related to usability and interface design, certifications, directives from regulatory bodies, educational initiatives in health information technology (HIT) safety as well as research into safer HIT design and implementation methods. ConclusionsHIT promises to lead to improved patient safety. However, it has become recognized that if not designed and deployed appropriately, such systems can lead to new types of errors. Based on this recognition, a variety of initiatives are being undertaken in Canada, the United States and England to promote the safe design, procurement and deployment of HIT. It is concluded that improved approaches to system design, testing, regulation, error reporting, safety education and cross-country collaboration will be needed to further promote safer HIT.