Dataset Information

Health Professionals' Perspectives on Electronic Medical Record Infusion and Individual Performance: Model Development and Questionnaire Survey Study.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Electronic medical records (EMRs) are integrated information sources generated by health care professionals (HCPs) from various health care information systems. EMRs play crucial roles in improving the quality of care and medical decision-making and in facilitating cross-hospital health information exchange. Although many hospitals have invested considerable resources and efforts to develop EMRs for several years, the factors affecting the long-term success of EMRs, particularly in the EMR infusion stage, remain unclear.

Objective

The aim of this study was to investigate the effects of technology, user, and task characteristics on EMR infusion to determine the factors that largely affect EMR infusion. In addition, we examined the effect of EMR infusion on individual HCP performance.

Methods

A questionnaire survey was used to collect data from HCPs with >6 months experience in using EMRs in a Taiwanese teaching hospital. A total of 316 questionnaires were distributed and 211 complete copies were returned, yielding a valid response rate of 66.8%. The collected data were further analyzed using WarpPLS 5.0.

Results

EMR infusion (R²=0.771) was mainly affected by user habits (β=.411), portability (β=.217), personal innovativeness (β=.198), technostress (β=.169), and time criticality (β=.168), and individual performance (R²=0.541) was affected by EMR infusion (β=.735). This finding indicated that user (habit, personal innovativeness, and technostress), technology (portability), and task (mobility and time criticality) characteristics have major effects on EMR infusion. Furthermore, the results indicated that EMR infusion positively affects individual performance.

Conclusions

The factors identified in this study can extend information systems infusion theory and provide useful insights for the further improvement of EMR development in hospitals and by the government, specifically in its infusion stage. In addition, the developed instrument can be used as an assessment tool to identify the key factors for EMR infusion, and to evaluate the extent of EMR infusion and the individual performance of hospitals that have implemented EMR systems. Moreover, the results can help governments to understand the urgent needs of hospitals in implementing EMR systems, provide sufficient resources and support to improve the incentives of EMR development, and develop adequate EMR policies for the meaningful use of electronic health records among hospitals and clinics.

SUBMITTER: Chen RF

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8672292 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundPatients' privacy is regarded as essential for the patient-doctor relationship. One example of a privacy-enhancing technology for user-controlled data minimization on content level is a redactable signature. It enables users to redact personal information from signed documents while preserving the validity of the signature, and thus the authenticity of the document. In this study, we present end users' evaluations of a Cloud-based selective authentic electronic health record (EHR) exchange service (SAE-service) in an electronic health use case. In the use case scenario, patients were given control to redact specified information fields in their EHR, which were signed by their doctors with a redactable signature and transferred to them into a Cloud platform. They can then selectively disclose the remaining information in the EHR, which still bears the valid digital signature, to third parties of their choice.ObjectiveThis study aimed to explore the perceptions, attitudes, and mental models concerning the SAE-service of 2 user roles: signers (medical professionals) and redactors (patients with different technical knowledge) in Germany and Sweden. Another objective was to elicit usability requirements for this service based on the analysis of our investigation.MethodsWe chose empirical qualitative methods to address our research objective. Designs of mock-ups for the service were used as part of our user-centered design approach in our studies with test participants from Germany and Sweden. A total of 13 individual walk-throughs or interviews were conducted with medical staff to investigate the EHR signers' perspectives. Moreover, 5 group walk-throughs in focus groups sessions with (N=32) prospective patients with different technical knowledge to investigate redactor's perspective of EHR data redaction control were used.ResultsWe found that our study participants had correct mental models with regard to the redaction process. Users with some technical models lacked trust in the validity of the doctor's signature on the redacted documents. Main results to be considered are the requirements concerning the accountability of the patients' redactions and the design of redaction templates for guidance and control.ConclusionsFor the SAE-service to be means for enhancing patient control and privacy, the diverse usability and trust factors of different user groups should be considered.

Project description:BackgroundAround half the US population uses dietary supplements (DS), and concomitant use with medications is common. Many DS include bioactive substances that can interact with medications; therefore, accurate tracking is critical for patient safety. Unfortunately, documentation of patients' DS use is often missing or incomplete in the electronic medical record (EMR), leaving patients susceptible to potential adverse events. Novel approaches to assist healthcare professionals (HCPs) in capturing patients' DS use are needed.ObjectiveTo assess HCPs' perspectives on challenges and facilitators of DS documentation in the EMR and their opinions on a proposed mHealth application (app) to aid in DS capture.MethodsHCPs, recruited from professional networks, largely in North Carolina, using purposive sampling, took part in semi-structured interviews. We inquired about HCPs' experiences with DS documentation in the EMR and their opinions about our proposed mHealth app. Interviews were recorded, transcribed, and coded. Thematic analysis included deductive codes based on the interview guide, and inductive codes that emerged during transcript review.ResultsHCPs (N = 30) included 60% females, mean age 46 ± 10; 70% White. Pharmacists (20%), nurses (17%), and physicians (17%) were the most represented professions. Years in practice ranged from 3-35 years. Most HCPs were concerned about DS safety and potential supplement-drug interactions, and cited several barriers to accurate EMR DS documentation including time constraints, database inconsistencies, and poor patient-HCP communication about DS. HCPs' views on our proposed mHealth app were generally positive. They expressed that our proposed mHealth app could streamline documentation processes and enhance patient-provider communication. HCPs expressed desire for a high-quality mHealth app that includes access to evidence-based DS information, integrates with the EMR, and does not increase time burdens.ConclusionHCPs believe documentation of patients' DS use is important but not accurately captured in the EMR. Support was expressed for our proposed barcode-scanning DS mHealth app.

Project description:Background and objectivesAn unintended consequence of electronic medical record use in the United States is the potential effect on graduate physician training. We assessed educational burdens and benefits of electronic medical record use on United States nephrology fellows by means of a survey.Design, setting, participants, & measurementsWe used an anonymous online opinion survey of all United States nephrology program directors (n=148), their faculty, and fellows. Program directors forwarded survey links to fellows and clinical faculty, indicating to how many they forwarded the link. The three surveys had parallel questions to permit comparisons.ResultsTwenty-two percent of program directors (n=33) forwarded surveys to faculty (n=387) and fellows (n=216; 26% of United States nephrology fellows). Faculty and fellow response rates were 25% and 33%, respectively; 51% of fellows agreed/strongly agreed that the electronic medical record contributed positively to their education. Perceived positive effects included access flexibility and ease of obtaining laboratory/radiology results. Negative effects included copy-forward errors and excessive, irrelevant documentation. Electronic medical record function was reported to be slow, disrupted, or completely lost monthly or more by >40%, and these were significantly less likely to agree that the electronic medical record contributed positively to their education. Electronic medical record completion time demands contributed to fellow reluctance to do procedures (52%), participate in conferences (57%), prolong patient interactions (74%), and do patient-directed reading (55%). Sixty-five percent of fellows reported often/sometimes exceeding work-hours limits due to documentation time demands; 85% of faculty reported often/sometimes observing copy-forward errors. Limitations include potential nonresponse and social desirability bias.ConclusionsRespondents reported that the electronic medical record enhances fellow education with efficient and geographically flexible patient data access, but the time demands of data and order entry reduce engagement in educational activities, contribute to work-hours violations, and diminish direct patient interactions.