The influence of digital technologies on resilient performance: Contributions, drawbacks, and a research agenda

The growing use of digital technologies (DTs) has a myriad of implications to socio-technical systems, which are not yet fully recognised. This paper investigates the contributions and drawbacks of DTs to resilient performance (RP), an aspect that so far has received less attention in comparison to others such as efficiency. To this end, a survey questionnaire was applied to 79 academics and practitioners linked to resilience engineering. Data analysis involved descriptive statistics and a thematic analysis of the open-text responses to the survey. Mixed impacts were identified, with 10 themes related to contributions and 16 to drawbacks. Regarding the contributions, the results highlighted the use of DTs for monitoring and anticipating system performance. Machine learning seems to be the most promising approach for this purpose. A key drawback is the need for developing new skills across the workforce so that they can make sense of the outputs of DTs and are aware of their strengths and weaknesses. The human role is expected to remain crucial for RP, which makes the current coordination difficulties with DTs even more important to address. A research agenda composed of five topics is proposed, encompassing description, prescription, and assessment. The agenda emphasizes the need for mapping the attributes or functionalities of DTs onto resilience concepts, models, and frameworks.

Barriers and facilitators to adoption of soft copy interpretation from the user perspective: Lessons learned from filmless radiology for slideless pathology

Background:

Adoption of digital images for pathological specimens has been slower than adoption of digital images in radiology, despite a number of anticipated advantages for digital images in pathology. In this paper, we explore the factors that might explain this slower rate of adoption.

Materials and Method:

Semi-structured interviews on barriers and facilitators to the adoption of digital images were conducted with two radiologists, three pathologists, and one pathologist's assistant.

Results:

Barriers and facilitators to adoption of digital images were reported in the areas of performance, workflow-efficiency, infrastructure, integration with other software, and exposure to digital images. The primary difference between the settings was that performance with the use of digital images as compared to the traditional method was perceived to be higher in radiology and lower in pathology. Additionally, exposure to digital images was higher in radiology than pathology, with some radiologists exclusively having been trained and/or practicing with digital images. The integration of digital images both improved and reduced efficiency in routine and non-routine workflow patterns in both settings, and was variable across the different organizations. A comparison of these findings with prior research on adoption of other health information technologies suggests that the barriers to adoption of digital images in pathology are relatively tractable.

Conclusions:

Improving performance using digital images in pathology would likely accelerate adoption of innovative technologies that are facilitated by the use of digital images, such as electronic imaging databases, electronic health records, double reading for challenging cases, and computer-aided diagnostic systems.