Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24523391›Full record

ArticleJournal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA2014

A qualitative study identifying the cost categories associated with electronic health record implementation in the UK.

Sarah P Slight, Casey Quinn, Anthony J Avery, David W Bates, Aziz Sheikh

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 2 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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
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

5 authors.

Sarah P SlightSchool of Medicine, Pharmacy and Health, University of Durham, Stockton-on-Tees, UK The Center for Patient Safety Research and Practice, Division of General Internal Medicine, The Center for Patient Safety Research and Practice, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, USA eHealth Research Group, Centre for Population Health Sciences, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.
Casey QuinnPRMA Consulting Ltd, Fleet, UK.
Anthony J AveryDivision of Primary Care, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK.
David W BatesThe Center for Patient Safety Research and Practice, Division of General Internal Medicine, The Center for Patient Safety Research and Practice, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, USA Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA Harvard School of Public Health, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
Aziz SheikhThe Center for Patient Safety Research and Practice, Division of General Internal Medicine, The Center for Patient Safety Research and Practice, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, USA eHealth Research Group, Centre for Population Health Sciences, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveWe conducted a prospective evaluation of different forms of electronic health record (EHR) systems to better understand the costs incurred during implementation and the factors that can influence these costs.

methodsWe selected a range of diverse organizations across three different geographical areas in England that were at different stages of implementing three centrally procured applications, that is, iSOFT's Lorenzo Regional Care, Cerner's Millennium, and CSE's RiO. 41 semi-structured interviews were conducted with hospital staff, members of the implementation team, and those involved in the implementation at a national level.

resultsFour main overarching cost categories were identified: infrastructure (eg, hardware and software), personnel (eg, training team), estates/facilities (eg, space), and other (eg, training materials). Many factors were felt to impact on these costs, with different hospitals choosing varying amounts and types of infrastructure, diverse training approaches for staff, and different software applications to integrate with the new system.

conclusionsImproving the quality and safety of patient care through EHR adoption is a priority area for UK and US governments and policy makers worldwide. With cost considered one of the most significant barriers, it is important for hospitals and governments to be clear from the outset of the major cost categories involved and the factors that may impact on these costs. Failure to adequately train staff or to follow key steps in implementation has preceded many of the failures in this domain, which can create new safety hazards.

Indexed as

Hospital CostsAttitude of Health PersonnelDiffusion of InnovationMedical Records Systems, ComputerizedPersonnel, HospitalStaff DevelopmentState MedicineUnited Kingdom

Identifiers

PMID24523391
PMCPMC4173176

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.