Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21524315›Full record

SynthesisBMC medicine2011

Comparison of user groups' perspectives of barriers and facilitators to implementing electronic health records: a systematic review.

Carrie Anna McGinn, Sonya Grenier, Julie Duplantie, Nicola Shaw, Claude Sicotte, Luc Mathieu, Yvan Leduc, France Légaré, Marie-Pierre Gagnon

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMC medicine, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 158 papers, 13 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
158citing papers in PubMed, 13 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

158 citing papers in PubMed, 13 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. A systematic review of the impact of health information technology on nurses' time.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2020
    Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Pooled it
  10. m-Health adoption by healthcare professionals: a systematic review.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2016
    Pooled it
  11. Pooled it
  12. Pooled it
  13. Pooled it
  14. Trial
  15. Trial
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

98 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Carrie Anna McGinnResearch Centre of the Centre Hospitalier Universitaire du Québec, Québec, QC, Canada.
Sonya Grenier
Julie Duplantie
Nicola Shaw
Claude Sicotte
Luc Mathieu
Yvan Leduc
France Légaré
Marie-Pierre Gagnon

Funding

Canadian Institutes of Health Research 200609MSH-167016-HAS-CFBA-111141Canadian Institutes of Health Research 200805KRS-188487-KSB-CFBA-111141
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundElectronic health record (EHR) implementation is currently underway in Canada, as in many other countries. These ambitious projects involve many stakeholders with unique perceptions of the implementation process. EHR users have an important role to play as they must integrate the EHR system into their work environments and use it in their everyday activities. Users hold valuable, first-hand knowledge of what can limit or contribute to the success of EHR implementation projects. A comprehensive synthesis of EHR users' perceptions is key to successful future implementation. This systematic literature review was aimed to synthesize current knowledge of the barriers and facilitators influencing shared EHR implementation among its various users.

methodsCovering a period from 1999 to 2009, a literature search was conducted on nine electronic databases. Studies were included if they reported on users' perceived barriers and facilitators to shared EHR implementation, in healthcare settings comparable to Canada. Studies in all languages with an empirical study design were included. Quality and relevance of the studies were assessed. Four EHR user groups were targeted: physicians, other health care professionals, managers, and patients/public. Content analysis was performed independently by two authors using a validated extraction grid with pre-established categorization of barriers and facilitators for each group of EHR users.

resultsOf a total of 5,695 potentially relevant publications identified, 117 full text publications were obtained after screening titles and abstracts. After review of the full articles, 60 publications, corresponding to 52 studies, met the inclusion criteria. The most frequent adoption factors common to all user groups were design and technical concerns, ease of use, interoperability, privacy and security, costs, productivity, familiarity and ability with EHR, motivation to use EHR, patient and health professional interaction, and lack of time and workload. Each user group also identified factors specific to their professional and individual priorities.

conclusionsThis systematic review presents innovative research on the barriers and facilitators to EHR implementation. While important similarities between user groups are highlighted, differences between them demonstrate that each user group also has a unique perspective of the implementation process that should be taken into account.

Indexed as

Attitude of Health PersonnelHealth Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeAttitude to ComputersCanadaData CollectionElectronic Health RecordsHealth Plan ImplementationHumansPatient Acceptance of Health Care

Identifiers

PMID21524315
PMCPMC3103434

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.