Trial reportInternational journal of medical informatics2014
Implementation of an electronic medical record does not change delivery of preventive care for HIV-positive patients.
Trial report in International journal of medical informatics, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Use of electronic medical records and quality of patient data: different reaction patterns of doctors and nurses to the hospital organization.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
purposeThis study sought to determine the impact that an electronic medical record (EMR) had on the provision of preventive health measures - including obtaining serologies for viral hepatitis and administering vaccinations to non-immune patients - to HIV patients at a hospital-based clinic.
methodsUsing a pre-post study design, we compared rates of preventive health delivery to HIV patients at an outpatient clinic during the use of a paper medical record (PMR) and after implementation of an EMR. Retrospective chart reviews were conducted at two time points: 12-16 months prior to and 24 months following EMR implementation. The records of 160 active patients were randomly selected for review during both time periods.
resultsThere was no difference between the PMR and EMR samples with regard to the proportion of patients who had hepatitis A (83% in PMR group; 77% in EMR) and hepatitis C (94% in both groups) serologies measured or the proportion of eligible patients who were given hepatitis vaccinations. Slightly fewer patients had a serology for hepatitis B measured in the EMR sample.
conclusionsAs EMR implementation expands, it is important to evaluate the effects that EMRs have on patient outcomes, including preventive health provision. Our study showed that after implementation of an EMR, the provision of most preventive care measures did not improve. This finding is in agreement with many published studies. Some studies have found positive effects from EMRs that may be attributable to specific aspects of EMRs. Further study of the effect of specific EMR attributes on health care outcomes is needed.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.