Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22364529›Full record

SynthesisBMC medical informatics and decision making2012

Impact of electronic medical record on physician practice in office settings: a systematic review.

Francis Lau, Morgan Price, Jeanette Boyd, Colin Partridge, Heidi Bell, Rebecca Raworth

Abstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMC medical informatics and decision making, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 69 papers, 7 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
69citing papers in PubMed, 7 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

69 citing papers in PubMed, 7 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Trial
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Appraising eHealth Investment for Africa: Scoping Review and Development of a Framework.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2024
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. Article

9 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

6 authors.

Francis LauSchool of Health Information Science, University of Victoria, P,O, Box 3050 STN CSC, Victoria V8W3P5, Canada. fylau@uvic.ca
Morgan Price
Jeanette Boyd
Colin Partridge
Heidi Bell
Rebecca Raworth

Funding

Canadian Institutes of Health Research
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIncreased investments are being made for electronic medical records (EMRs) in Canada. There is a need to learn from earlier EMR studies on their impact on physician practice in office settings. To address this need, we conducted a systematic review to examine the impact of EMRs in the physician office, factors that influenced their success, and the lessons learned.

resultsFor this review we included publications cited in Medline and CINAHL between 2000 and 2009 on physician office EMRs. Studies were included if they evaluated the impact of EMR on physician practice in office settings. The Clinical Adoption Framework provided a conceptual scheme to make sense of the findings and allow for future comparison/alignment to other Canadian eHealth initiatives.In the final selection, we included 27 controlled and 16 descriptive studies. We examined six areas: prescribing support, disease management, clinical documentation, work practice, preventive care, and patient-physician interaction. Overall, 22/43 studies (51.2%) and 50/109 individual measures (45.9%) showed positive impacts, 18.6% studies and 18.3% measures had negative impacts, while the remaining had no effect. Forty-eight distinct factors were identified that influenced EMR success. Several lessons learned were repeated across studies: (a) having robust EMR features that support clinical use; (b) redesigning EMR-supported work practices for optimal fit; (c) demonstrating value for money; (d) having realistic expectations on implementation; and (e) engaging patients in the process.

conclusionsCurrently there is limited positive EMR impact in the physician office. To improve EMR success one needs to draw on the lessons from previous studies such as those in this review.

Indexed as

Electronic Health RecordsFamily PracticeDiffusion of InnovationHumansPhysician-Patient RelationsPreventive Health ServicesProspective Studies

Identifiers

PMID22364529
PMCPMC3315440

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.