Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25377010›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2014

Physician user satisfaction with an electronic medical records system in primary healthcare centres in Al Ain: a qualitative study.

Shamma Al Alawi, Aysha Al Dhaheri, Durra Al Baloushi, Mouza Al Dhaheri, Engela A M Prinsloo

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
29citing papers in PubMed, 3 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

29 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Digital Disruption and Big Data in Healthcare - Opportunities and Challenges.ClinicoEconomics and outcomes research : CEOR · 2022
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
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.

Shamma Al AlawiAmbulatory Health Care Services, SEHA, Al Ain, Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0955-5382
Aysha Al DhaheriAmbulatory Health Care Services, SEHA, Al Ain, Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates.
Durra Al BaloushiAmbulatory Health Care Services, SEHA, Al Ain, Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates.
Mouza Al DhaheriHomecare Department, Tawam Hospital in Affiliation with Johns Hopkins Medicine, Al Ain, Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates.
Engela A M PrinslooDepartment of Family Medicine, College of Medicine and Health Sciences UAE University, Al Ain, Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo explore physician satisfaction with an electronic medical records (EMR) system, to identify and explore the main limitations of the system and finally to submit recommendations to address these limitations.

designA descriptive qualitative study that entailed three focus group interviews was performed among physicians using open-ended questions. The interviews were audiotaped, documented and transcribed verbatim. The themes were explored and analysed in different categories.

settingThe study was conducted in primary healthcare centres (PHC) in Al Ain, United Arab Emirates (UAE).

participantsA total of 23 physicians, all using the same EMR system, attended one of three focus groups held in PHC in Al Ain Medical District. Each focus group consisted of 7-9 physicians working in PHC as family medicine specialists, residents or general practitioners. PRIMARY OUTCOME MEASURE: Physician satisfaction with the EMR system.

resultsKey themes emerged and were categorised as physician-dependent, patient-related and system-related factors. In general, physicians were satisfied with the EMR system in spite of initial difficulties with implementation. Most participants identified that the long time required to do the documentation affected their practice and patient communication. Many physicians expressed satisfaction with the orders and results of laboratory and radiology functions and they emphasised that this was the strongest point in the EMR. They were also satisfied with the electronic prescription function, stating that it reduced errors and saved time.

conclusionsPhysicians are satisfied with the EMR and have a positive perception regarding the application of the system. Several themes emerged during this study that need to be considered to enhance the EMR system. Further studies need to be conducted among other healthcare practitioners and patients to explore their attitude and perception about the EMR.

Indexed as

Electronic Health RecordsHealth Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeJob SatisfactionPhysiciansFemaleHumansMalePrimary Health CareQualitative ResearchUnited Arab Emiratescomputerized health informationElectronic health recordsEMRphysician satisfaction

Identifiers

PMID25377010
PMCPMC4225459

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.