Intended for healthcare professionals

Information In Practice

Challenges to implementing the national programme for information technology (NPfIT): a qualitative study

BMJ 2005; 331 doi: (Published 04 August 2005) Cite this as: BMJ 2005;331:331
  1. Jane Hendy (jane.hendy{at}, research fellow1,
  2. Barnaby C Reeves, reader in epidemiology1,
  3. Naomi Fulop, senior lecturer in health services delivery and organisational research1,
  4. Andrew Hutchings, lecturer in health services research1,
  5. Cristina Masseria, research fellow1
  1. 1 Department of Public Health and Policy, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London WC1E 7HT
  1. Correspondence to: J Hendy
  • Accepted 27 May 2005


Objectives To describe the context for implementing the national programme for information technology (NPfIT) in England, actual and perceived barriers, and opportunities to facilitate implementation.

Design Case studies and in depth interviews, with themes identified using a framework developed from grounded theory.

Setting Four acute NHS trusts in England.

Participants Senior trust managers and clinicians, including chief executives, directors of information technology, medical directors, and directors of nursing.

Results The trusts varied in their circumstances, which may affect their ability to implement the NPfIT. The process of implementation has been suboptimal, leading to reports of low morale by the NHS staff responsible for implementation. The overall timetable is unrealistic, and trusts are uncertain about their implementation schedules. Short term benefits alone are unlikely to persuade NHS staff to adopt the national programme enthusiastically, and some may experience a loss of electronic functionality in the short term.

Conclusions: The sociocultural challenges to implementing the NPfIT are as daunting as the technical and logistical ones. Senior NHS staff feel these have been neglected. We recommend that national programme managers prioritise strategies to improve communication with, and to gain the cooperation of, front line staff.


  • Contributors JH planned, conducted, and reported the work. BCR, NF, and AH planned and reported the work. CM conducted and reported the work. NF is guarantor for the study.

  • Funding This project is funded by the NHS Service Delivery and Organisation R&D Programme (reference SDO/44/2003).

  • Competing interests None declared.

  • Ethical approval NHS Trent Multi-centre Research Ethics Committee and NHS Trust Local Research Ethics Committees.

  • Accepted 27 May 2005
View Full Text