Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34620677›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2021

How does implementation of an electronic medical record system impact nurses' work motivation, engagement, satisfaction and well-being? A realist review protocol.

Rebecca M Jedwab, Bernice Redley, Elizabeth Manias, Naomi Dobroff, Alison M Hutchinson

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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.

Rebecca M JedwabSchool of Nursing and Midwifery, Centre for Quality and Patient Safety Research, Institute for Health Transformation, Deakin University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia jedwabr@deakin.edu.au.ORCID 0000-0003-3014-8797
Bernice RedleySchool of Nursing and Midwifery, Centre for Quality and Patient Safety Research, Institute for Health Transformation, Deakin University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-2376-3989
Elizabeth ManiasSchool of Nursing and Midwifery, Centre for Quality and Patient Safety Research, Institute for Health Transformation, Deakin University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-3747-0087
Naomi DobroffNursing and Midwifery Informatics, Monash Health, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Alison M HutchinsonSchool of Nursing and Midwifery, Centre for Quality and Patient Safety Research, Institute for Health Transformation, Deakin University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-5065-2726

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionElectronic medical record (EMR) systems are used worldwide as repositories for patients' clinical information, providing clinical decision support and increasing visibility of and access to clinical information. While EMR systems facilitate improved healthcare delivery, emerging reports suggest potential detrimental effects on clinician well-being. EMR system implementation influences on nurses' work motivation, engagement, satisfaction and well-being (including burnout) are not well understood, nor have they been examined in relation to contextual factors and mechanisms of action. This paper presents a realist review protocol to examine causal explanations to address the question: How, why and under what circumstances does the implementation of a new hospital EMR system or similar technology impact nurses' work motivation, engagement, satisfaction or well-being? METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The five-step method for realist review will be used to identify causal relationships, how the relationships work, for whom and under what circumstances: (1) defining the review scope; (2) developing initial program theories; (3) searching the evidence; (4) selecting and appraising the evidence; (5) extracting and synthesising the data. Initial program theories were developed using scoping review findings and qualitative data collected from nurses pre-EMR and post-EMR. Five databases will be systematically searched from 1 January 2000 to 31 October 2021 (APA PsycInfo, CINAHL, Embase, IEEE Xplore and MEDLINE Complete), and forward and backward citation searching, grey literature searching and literature recommended by the research team. Search results will be screened by two research team members. Data extracted will assist in refining program theories to develop a conceptual model that synthesises how work motivation, engagement, satisfaction and well-being may influence, or be influenced by, an EMR implementation. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The larger project has previously obtained low-risk ethics approval. The review will be published in a peer-reviewed journal and reported as per RAMESES guidelines. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42020131875.

Indexed as

MotivationNursesDelivery of Health CareElectronic Health RecordsHumansPersonal SatisfactionReview Literature as Topicchange managementhealth informaticsprotocols & guidelines

Identifiers

PMID34620677
PMCPMC8499349

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.