Scholarlink

Background <p>The digital transformation of healthcare is often hindered by various legal, ethical, financial, technological, and other barriers. Often, organizations already contain the expert knowledge needed to help innovators with these challenges, but highly fragmented. In an attempt to centralize this support, many major healthcare centers have established some form of innovation center or lab. The innovative performance of innovation labs is strongly influenced by the composition and dynamics of the group of affiliated experts. We have studied how the group of supporting experts view the activities of the innovation lab they contribute to. With our results, we aim to better understand the innovation process and possibly increase the chances of success of digital health innovations.</p> Methods <p>Our research was performed at two innovation labs in Dutch academic hospitals. We performed an exploratory, qualitative study using semi-structured interviews for data collection. All 29 participants were recruited based on their involvement with the current innovation process at one of the two labs. Codes and categories were derived inductively from the interview transcripts.</p> Results <p>We identified five major themes in our data: experts’ own definitions of their roles, factors influencing the probability of success of an innovation, fundamentals of the innovation process (focusing on the definition of innovation and requirements for progression), potential improvements in the current innovation processes, and cultural aspects of the organization pertaining to innovation.</p> Conclusions <p>Our findings confirm that supporting experts play an essential role in innovation processes. They have helped us understand how expected impact, characteristics of a possible external party, characteristics of the innovation process, and characteristics of the stakeholders involved all influence the chance of innovation success. These factors should be taken into consideration in the selection and prioritization of novel items entering the innovation process.</p> <p>Minimizing the organizational requirements to innovate may greatly speed up the innovation process. This can be aided by distinguishing between pilots outside of patient-facing environments, pilots in patient-facing environments, and large-scale implementations.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Hospital-based innovation labs to accelerate digital health transformation: lessons learned from twenty types of experts

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2025年8月14日

查看全文
  • Eric R. Edelman,
  • Joost G. E. Verbeek,
  • Perry Hunen,
  • Martijn de Groot,
  • Nicole van Eldik,
  • Marieke D. Spreeuwenberg

摘要

Background

The digital transformation of healthcare is often hindered by various legal, ethical, financial, technological, and other barriers. Often, organizations already contain the expert knowledge needed to help innovators with these challenges, but highly fragmented. In an attempt to centralize this support, many major healthcare centers have established some form of innovation center or lab. The innovative performance of innovation labs is strongly influenced by the composition and dynamics of the group of affiliated experts. We have studied how the group of supporting experts view the activities of the innovation lab they contribute to. With our results, we aim to better understand the innovation process and possibly increase the chances of success of digital health innovations.

Methods

Our research was performed at two innovation labs in Dutch academic hospitals. We performed an exploratory, qualitative study using semi-structured interviews for data collection. All 29 participants were recruited based on their involvement with the current innovation process at one of the two labs. Codes and categories were derived inductively from the interview transcripts.

Results

We identified five major themes in our data: experts’ own definitions of their roles, factors influencing the probability of success of an innovation, fundamentals of the innovation process (focusing on the definition of innovation and requirements for progression), potential improvements in the current innovation processes, and cultural aspects of the organization pertaining to innovation.

Conclusions

Our findings confirm that supporting experts play an essential role in innovation processes. They have helped us understand how expected impact, characteristics of a possible external party, characteristics of the innovation process, and characteristics of the stakeholders involved all influence the chance of innovation success. These factors should be taken into consideration in the selection and prioritization of novel items entering the innovation process.

Minimizing the organizational requirements to innovate may greatly speed up the innovation process. This can be aided by distinguishing between pilots outside of patient-facing environments, pilots in patient-facing environments, and large-scale implementations.