ArticleJMIR human factors2020
Health Care Staff's Experiences of Engagement When Introducing a Digital Decision Support System for Wound Management: Qualitative Study.
Article in JMIR human factors, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Exploring the role of professional identity in the implementation of clinical decision support systems-a narrative review.Implementation science : IS · 2024Pooled it
- Stakeholder Perspectives of Clinical Artificial Intelligence Implementation: Systematic Review of Qualitative Evidence.Journal of medical Internet research · 2023Pooled it
- A Systematic Review of Factors Affecting Utilization of Decision Support Systems: The Interplay Between Technology, Users, and the Healthcare Environment.Health science reports · 2026Review
- How clinical structures shape diagnostic practices in Swedish hard-to-heal ulcer care: a grounded theory study.BMJ open · 2025Article
- Applications of human factors approaches and methods to the development of teleconsultations in primary care: a systematic scoping review.BMJ open quality · 2025Article
- The influencing factors of nurses' job engagement in tertiary, A grade hospitals in East China: A cross-sectional study.Nursing open · 2024Article
- Development and validation of the DHIS2 platform for integrating sociomedical data to study wound care outcomes.PloS one · 2024Article
- Antibiotic prescription using a digital decision support system: a register-based study of patients with hard-to-heal ulcers in Sweden.BMJ open · 2022Article
- Still engaged - healthcare staff's engagement when introducing a new eHealth solution for wound management: a qualitative study.BMC health services research · 2022Article
- Process Evaluation of a Randomized Controlled Trial With a Mobile Health Intervention for Children With Obesity.Sage open pediatricsArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundeHealth solutions such as digital decision support systems (DDSSs) have the potential to assist collaboration between health care staff to improve matters for specific patient groups. Patients with hard-to-heal ulcers have long healing times because of a lack of guidelines for structured diagnosis, treatment, and follow-up. Multidisciplinary collaboration in wound management teams is essential. A DDSS could offer a way of aiding improvement within wound management. The introduction of eHealth solutions into health care is complicated, and the engagement of the staff seems crucial. Factors influencing and affecting engagement need to be understood and considered for the introduction of a DDSS to succeed.
objectiveThis study aims to describe health care staff's experiences of engagement and barriers to and influencers of engagement when introducing a DDSS for wound management.
methodsThis study uses a qualitative approach. Interviews were conducted with 11 health care staff within primary (n=4), community (n=6), and specialist (n=1) care during the start-up of the introduction of a DDSS for wound management. The interviews focused on the staff's experiences of engagement. Content analysis by Burnard was used in the data analysis process.
resultsA total of 4 categories emerged describing the participants' experiences of engagement: a personal liaison, a professional commitment, an extended togetherness, and an awareness and understanding of the circumstances.
conclusionsThis study identifies barriers to and influencers of engagement, reinforcing that staff experience engagement through feeling a personal liaison and a professional commitment to make things better for their patients. In addition, engagement is nourished by sharing with coworkers and by active support and understanding from leadership.
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.