New Technology in Healthcare

Workflows
There are a few different concepts in the Workflow Assessment for Health IT Toolkit. The first is that the workflow is a "sequence of mental and physical tasks." This is key to understanding the rest of the page. A workflow is how work is done, given a problem, how to solve it. The workflow is therefore the key to process improvement. By understanding how work is done right now, it is easier to see how the process can be improved, to meet whatever improvement (e.g. time, quality) is desired.
The second insight about workflows is that a workflow needs to be subject to analysis, in particular if there is a fault that is occurring – if something is amiss then the workflow should be examined to see where it can be repaired. The article provides a number of tools by which a workflow can be analyzed. The workflow analysis provides the basis for identifying areas of waste, such as inefficient or needless processes.
There are also workflow tools So a third insight from that page is to visualize the different workflows that might be common in a healthcare organization. Having a sense of what the major issues are with respect to the organization is important; understanding what a basic workflow looks like is also important. There are a number of techniques that are used in analyzing workflows, including interviewing the people who use the system, testing, mapping the workflows, and creating flowcharts. These processes can also be used to evaluate proposed workflows. For example, the proposed workflow can be mapped out and compared with the existing one, to ensure that there is genuinely an improvement.
Summary
The article on FluAlert looks at some of the issues that are impeding flu shot delivery. The study explored "pediatric providers' perceived barriers to influenza vaccine delivery." The study was conducted over four focus groups, and five individual interviews. These interviews identified several different barriers to influenza vaccine delivery. Amazingly, this included remembering to vaccine, because writing stuff down is hard. Time shortages and inadequate staffing were also identified. Basically, the barriers were that the doctors were poor managers, and borderline unprofessional in how they run their operation.
The conclusion was that these issues were probably intractable so an alert would help – the alert would trigger early in the patient visit, determine the patient's vaccine status, and create appropriate documentation. The latter is a task that should reasonably be automated, but it's pretty amazing that doctors need an alert to remember stuff, and can't be bothered asking if the patient has received a flu shot. The basic conclusion of the paper is that there is a market for this FluAlert idea.
I would not say that this article helps with a workflow in my organization. The scenario described is a workflow, but it is a borderline unprofessional one. In my organization, forgetting to do basic things like give people the shots they need, and discuss with the patient (or in this case the patient's parents) their history, even something as basic as "have you had a flu shot this season?", well I cannot say that this would occur in my organization .We're actually organized. These things are built into our workflow. This is an example of a broken workflow – my sense is that my organization can do better on things, but would never be this bad.
Importance of Technology on Workflows
Changing technology will change the workflow. A workflow, therefore, is not just something to create and then file away. It should be treated as a living document, something to be reviewed and updated with a certain amount of regularity. If a new technology is introduced –a FluAlert for example- the then workflow will change. In most instances, the technology would either result in a change to a task, or it would replace a task or two. The FluAlert might replace two or three tasks, for example. Technology should, ideally, add value by streamlining a workflow. When that happens, the workflow should be updated to reflect that change.
References
AHRQ (2018) Health information technology. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. Retrieved January 9, 2018 from https://healthit.ahrq.gov/health-it-tools-and-resources/evaluation-resources/workflow-assessment-health-it-toolkit/workflow

Birmingham, E., Catallozzi, M., Findley, S. E., Vawdrey, D. K., Kukafka, R., & Stockwell, M. S. (2011). FluAlert: a qualitative evaluation of providers' desired characteristics and concerns regarding computerized influenza vaccination alerts. Preventive medicine, 52(3), 274-277.