ArticleJournal of the American Association of Nurse Practitioners2014
Patient experiences with electronic medical records: lessons learned.
Article in Journal of the American Association of Nurse Practitioners, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Physicians' and Patients' Expectations From Digital Agents for Consultations: Interview Study Among Physicians and Patients.JMIR human factors · 2024Article
- An Analysis of the Learning Health System in Its First Decade in Practice: Scoping Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2020Article
- Patient satisfaction with the implementation of electronic medical Records in the Western Region, Saudi Arabia, 2018.BMC family practice · 2020Article
- Exploring association between certified EHRs adoption and patient experience in U.S. psychiatric hospitals.PloS one · 2020Article
- Where is the patient's chair? Differences in general practitioner consultation room layouts - an exploratory questionnaire.F1000Research · 2019Article
- Integrating Patient-Centered Electronic Health Record Communication Training into Resident Onboarding: Curriculum Development and Post-Implementation Survey Among Housestaff.JMIR medical education · 2018Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo describe the lived experience of patients communicating with their nurse practitioners and physicians while using paper health records (PHRs) and electronic health records (EHRs) in the examination rooms. The significance of the study lies in the salience of communication between the patient and provider in promoting optimal clinical outcomes and the highest level of patient satisfaction. DATA SOURCES: The study used a qualitative, phenomenological design. Audio-taped focus group interviews were conducted with 21 patients from a diabetes clinic in Baltimore, Maryland. Patients had visits with the provider before and after implementation of EHRs in the clinic.
conclusionsThe four themes that emerged from the three focus groups included communication issues, patient preferences for electronic records, safety and security concerns, and transition problems with implementation of EHRs. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Potential benefits for nurse practitioners implementing the recommendations in this study include enhanced communication between patients and providers while using EHRs, increased patient satisfaction, higher levels of nurse practitioner and physician satisfaction, and avoidance of communication issues during implementation of EHR systems.
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.