Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Implementation Science 1/2014

Open Access 01-12-2014 | Research

Implementation and use of electronic synoptic cancer reporting: an explorative case study of six Norwegian pathology laboratories

Authors: Bettina Casati, Hans Kristian Haugland, Gunn Marit J Barstad, Roger Bjugn

Published in: Implementation Science | Issue 1/2014

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

The information contained in histopathology reports on surgical resections of cancer is fundamental for both patient treatment and cancer registries. Electronic synoptic histopathology reporting is considered superior to traditional narrative reporting with respect to both completeness and feasibility of data use. An electronic template for colorectal cancer reporting was introduced in Norway in 2005, but implementation has varied greatly between different pathology departments. In 2012, four pathology departments and the Norwegian Cancer Registry started a new initiative on electronic cancer reporting. As part of this initiative, this study was undertaken to learn more about factors influencing implementation and use.

Methods

Qualitative and quantitative data were obtained from six of the 17 public pathology departments in Norway using explorative case study methodology. Methods included document studies, semi-structured interviews with key informants, and audits on actual template use. A systematic analysis of data was conducted based on theoretical models for project management, stakeholder engagement, and individual acceptance of new information technology.

Results

Most key informants had a positive view on synoptic reporting, and five departments had tested the electronic template. Of these, four had implemented the template while one department had decided not to implement it due to layout concerns. Of the four departments using the template in daily routine, one had compulsory use, two consensus based use, while the fourth had voluntary use. Annual average usage of the electronic template in the three departments with compulsory or consensus based use was 92% compared to 53% in the department with voluntary use.

Conclusions

There was a general positive attitude towards electronic synoptic reporting. Reasons for not implementing the colorectal template were specific technical and quality issues not adequately addressed by the project organization having developed the template. A formal assessment of project outcomes with a task force handling such technical issues should accordingly have been established as part of the project. After an organizational decision on implementation, perceived job relevance and practical benefits are factors important for individual template use. Consistent high long-term usage was related to a departmental environment with a consensus based decision on use.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
go back to reference Casati B, Bjugn R: Structured electronic template for histopathology reporting on colorectal carcinoma resections: five-year follow-up shows sustainable long-term quality improvement. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2012, 136: 652-656. 10.5858/arpa.2011-0370-OA.CrossRefPubMed Casati B, Bjugn R: Structured electronic template for histopathology reporting on colorectal carcinoma resections: five-year follow-up shows sustainable long-term quality improvement. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2012, 136: 652-656. 10.5858/arpa.2011-0370-OA.CrossRefPubMed
2.
go back to reference Cross SS, Feeley KM, Angel CA: The effect of four interventions on the informational content of histopathology reports of resected colorectal carcinomas. J Clin Pathol. 1998, 51: 481-482. 10.1136/jcp.51.6.481.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Cross SS, Feeley KM, Angel CA: The effect of four interventions on the informational content of histopathology reports of resected colorectal carcinomas. J Clin Pathol. 1998, 51: 481-482. 10.1136/jcp.51.6.481.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
3.
go back to reference Ellis DW: Surgical pathology reporting at the crossroads: beyond synoptic reporting. Pathology. 2011, 43: 404-409. 10.1097/PAT.0b013e32834915e8.CrossRefPubMed Ellis DW: Surgical pathology reporting at the crossroads: beyond synoptic reporting. Pathology. 2011, 43: 404-409. 10.1097/PAT.0b013e32834915e8.CrossRefPubMed
4.
go back to reference Bjugn R, Casati B, Norstein J: Structured electronic template for histopathology reports on colorectal carcinomas: a joint project by the Cancer Registry of Norway and the Norwegian Society for Pathology. Hum Pathol. 2008, 39: 359-367. 10.1016/j.humpath.2007.06.019.CrossRefPubMed Bjugn R, Casati B, Norstein J: Structured electronic template for histopathology reports on colorectal carcinomas: a joint project by the Cancer Registry of Norway and the Norwegian Society for Pathology. Hum Pathol. 2008, 39: 359-367. 10.1016/j.humpath.2007.06.019.CrossRefPubMed
5.
go back to reference Srigley JR, McGowan T, Maclean A, Raby M, Ross J, Kramer S, Sawka C: Standardized synoptic cancer pathology reporting: a population-based approach. J Surg Oncol. 2009, 99: 517-524. 10.1002/jso.21282.CrossRefPubMed Srigley JR, McGowan T, Maclean A, Raby M, Ross J, Kramer S, Sawka C: Standardized synoptic cancer pathology reporting: a population-based approach. J Surg Oncol. 2009, 99: 517-524. 10.1002/jso.21282.CrossRefPubMed
6.
go back to reference Haugland HK, Casati B, Dorum LM, Bjugn R: Template reporting matters–a nationwide study on histopathology reporting on colorectal carcinoma resections. Hum Pathol. 2011, 42: 36-40. 10.1016/j.humpath.2010.06.009.CrossRefPubMed Haugland HK, Casati B, Dorum LM, Bjugn R: Template reporting matters–a nationwide study on histopathology reporting on colorectal carcinoma resections. Hum Pathol. 2011, 42: 36-40. 10.1016/j.humpath.2010.06.009.CrossRefPubMed
8.
go back to reference Yin RK: Introduction. Case study research: design and methods. Edited by: Bickman L, Rog DJ. 2009, Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA, 3-24. 4 Yin RK: Introduction. Case study research: design and methods. Edited by: Bickman L, Rog DJ. 2009, Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA, 3-24. 4
9.
go back to reference Lyytinen K, Newman M: Explaining information systems change: a punctuated socio-technical change model. Eur J Inform Syst. 2008, 17: 589-613. 10.1057/ejis.2008.50.CrossRef Lyytinen K, Newman M: Explaining information systems change: a punctuated socio-technical change model. Eur J Inform Syst. 2008, 17: 589-613. 10.1057/ejis.2008.50.CrossRef
10.
go back to reference Alter S: The work system method for understanding information systems and information systems research. Comm Assoc Inform Syst. 2002, 9 (Article 6): 90-104. Alter S: The work system method for understanding information systems and information systems research. Comm Assoc Inform Syst. 2002, 9 (Article 6): 90-104.
11.
go back to reference International Organization for Standardization: Guidance on project management (ISO 21500:2012). Geneva: 2012. International Organization for Standardization: Guidance on project management (ISO 21500:2012). Geneva: 2012.
12.
go back to reference Grol R, Grimshaw J: From best evidence to best practice: effective implementation of change in patients’ care. Lancet. 2003, 362: 1225-1230. 10.1016/S0140-6736(03)14546-1.CrossRefPubMed Grol R, Grimshaw J: From best evidence to best practice: effective implementation of change in patients’ care. Lancet. 2003, 362: 1225-1230. 10.1016/S0140-6736(03)14546-1.CrossRefPubMed
13.
go back to reference Casati B, Haugland HK, Barstad GMJ, Bjugn R: Factors affecting the implementation and use of electronic templates for histopathology cancer reporting. Pathology. 2014, 146: 165-168. 10.1097/PAT.0000000000000065.CrossRef Casati B, Haugland HK, Barstad GMJ, Bjugn R: Factors affecting the implementation and use of electronic templates for histopathology cancer reporting. Pathology. 2014, 146: 165-168. 10.1097/PAT.0000000000000065.CrossRef
14.
go back to reference Davis FD: Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quart. 1989, 13: 319-340. 10.2307/249008.CrossRef Davis FD: Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quart. 1989, 13: 319-340. 10.2307/249008.CrossRef
15.
go back to reference Venkatesh V, Bala H: Technology Acceptance Model 3 and a research agenda on interventions. Decision Sci. 2008, 39: 273-315. 10.1111/j.1540-5915.2008.00192.x.CrossRef Venkatesh V, Bala H: Technology Acceptance Model 3 and a research agenda on interventions. Decision Sci. 2008, 39: 273-315. 10.1111/j.1540-5915.2008.00192.x.CrossRef
17.
go back to reference Dicicco-Bloom B, Crabtree BF: The qualitative research interview. Med Educ. 2006, 40: 314-321. 10.1111/j.1365-2929.2006.02418.x.CrossRefPubMed Dicicco-Bloom B, Crabtree BF: The qualitative research interview. Med Educ. 2006, 40: 314-321. 10.1111/j.1365-2929.2006.02418.x.CrossRefPubMed
18.
go back to reference Simons H: Whose data are they? Ethics in case study research. Case study research in practice. 2009, Sage, London, 96-113.CrossRef Simons H: Whose data are they? Ethics in case study research. Case study research in practice. 2009, Sage, London, 96-113.CrossRef
19.
go back to reference Yin RK: Reporting case studies: how and what to compose. Case study research: design and methods. Edited by: Bickman L, Rog DJ. 2009, Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA, 165-191. 4 Yin RK: Reporting case studies: how and what to compose. Case study research: design and methods. Edited by: Bickman L, Rog DJ. 2009, Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA, 165-191. 4
20.
go back to reference Zarbo RJ: Determining customer satisfaction in anatomic pathology. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2006, 130: 645-649.PubMed Zarbo RJ: Determining customer satisfaction in anatomic pathology. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2006, 130: 645-649.PubMed
21.
go back to reference Maylor H: Project completion and review. Project management. 2010, Pearson Education, Harlow (UK), 360-383. 4 Maylor H: Project completion and review. Project management. 2010, Pearson Education, Harlow (UK), 360-383. 4
22.
go back to reference Valenstein PN: Formatting pathology reports: applying four design principles to improve communication and patient safety. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2008, 132: 84-94.PubMed Valenstein PN: Formatting pathology reports: applying four design principles to improve communication and patient safety. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2008, 132: 84-94.PubMed
23.
go back to reference Hassell LA, Parwani AV, Weiss L, Jones MA, Ye J: Challenges and opportunities in the adoption of College of American Pathologists checklists in electronic format: perspectives and experience of Reporting Pathology Protocols Project (RPP2) participant laboratories. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2010, 134: 1152-1159.PubMed Hassell LA, Parwani AV, Weiss L, Jones MA, Ye J: Challenges and opportunities in the adoption of College of American Pathologists checklists in electronic format: perspectives and experience of Reporting Pathology Protocols Project (RPP2) participant laboratories. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2010, 134: 1152-1159.PubMed
24.
go back to reference Urquhart R, Sargeant J, Porterm GA: Factors related to the implementation and use of an innovation in cancer surgery. Curr Oncol. 2011, 18: 271-279. 10.3747/co.v18i6.961.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Urquhart R, Sargeant J, Porterm GA: Factors related to the implementation and use of an innovation in cancer surgery. Curr Oncol. 2011, 18: 271-279. 10.3747/co.v18i6.961.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
26.
go back to reference Valente TW, Davis RL: Accelerating the diffusion of innovations using opinion leaders. Ann Am Acad Polit S S. 1999, 566: 55-67. 10.1177/0002716299566001005.CrossRef Valente TW, Davis RL: Accelerating the diffusion of innovations using opinion leaders. Ann Am Acad Polit S S. 1999, 566: 55-67. 10.1177/0002716299566001005.CrossRef
27.
go back to reference Duvalko KM, Sherar M, Sawka C: Creating a system for performance improvement in cancer care: Cancer Care Ontario's clinical governance framework. Cancer Control: Journal of the Moffitt Cancer Center. 2009, 16: 293-302. Duvalko KM, Sherar M, Sawka C: Creating a system for performance improvement in cancer care: Cancer Care Ontario's clinical governance framework. Cancer Control: Journal of the Moffitt Cancer Center. 2009, 16: 293-302.
28.
go back to reference Bagozzi RP: The legacy of the Technology Acceptance Model and a proposal for a paradigm shift. J Assoc Inf Syst. 2007, 8: 244-254. Bagozzi RP: The legacy of the Technology Acceptance Model and a proposal for a paradigm shift. J Assoc Inf Syst. 2007, 8: 244-254.
29.
go back to reference Chuttur M: Overview of the Technology Acceptance Model: origins, developments and future directions. Sprouts: Working Papers on Information Systems. 2009, 9 (Article 37): 1-21. Chuttur M: Overview of the Technology Acceptance Model: origins, developments and future directions. Sprouts: Working Papers on Information Systems. 2009, 9 (Article 37): 1-21.
30.
go back to reference Evered R, Loius MR: Alternative perspectives in the organizational sciences: ‘Inquiry from the inside’ and ‘Inquiry from the outside’. Acad Manage Rev. 1981, 6: 385-395. 10.5465/AMR.1981.4285776.CrossRef Evered R, Loius MR: Alternative perspectives in the organizational sciences: ‘Inquiry from the inside’ and ‘Inquiry from the outside’. Acad Manage Rev. 1981, 6: 385-395. 10.5465/AMR.1981.4285776.CrossRef
31.
go back to reference Dwyer SC, Buckle JL: The space between: on being an insider-outsider in qualitative research. Int J Qual Meth. 2009, 8: 54-63. Dwyer SC, Buckle JL: The space between: on being an insider-outsider in qualitative research. Int J Qual Meth. 2009, 8: 54-63.
32.
go back to reference Louis MR, Bartunek JM: Insider/outsider research teams: collaboration across diverse perspectives. J Manage Inquiry. 1992, 1: 101-110. 10.1177/105649269212002.CrossRef Louis MR, Bartunek JM: Insider/outsider research teams: collaboration across diverse perspectives. J Manage Inquiry. 1992, 1: 101-110. 10.1177/105649269212002.CrossRef
33.
go back to reference Thomas MD, Blacksmith J, Reno J: Utilizing insider-outsider research teams in qualitative research. Qual Health Res. 2000, 10: 819-828. 10.1177/104973200129118840.CrossRefPubMed Thomas MD, Blacksmith J, Reno J: Utilizing insider-outsider research teams in qualitative research. Qual Health Res. 2000, 10: 819-828. 10.1177/104973200129118840.CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
Implementation and use of electronic synoptic cancer reporting: an explorative case study of six Norwegian pathology laboratories
Authors
Bettina Casati
Hans Kristian Haugland
Gunn Marit J Barstad
Roger Bjugn
Publication date
01-12-2014
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
Implementation Science / Issue 1/2014
Electronic ISSN: 1748-5908
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s13012-014-0111-2

Other articles of this Issue 1/2014

Implementation Science 1/2014 Go to the issue