Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34704955›Full record

ArticleJMIR human factors2021

Medical Specialists' Perspectives on the Influence of Electronic Medical Record Use on the Quality of Hospital Care: Semistructured Interview Study.

Rube van Poelgeest, Augustinus Schrijvers, Albert Boonstra, Kit Roes

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR human factors, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. 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

4 authors.

Rube van PoelgeestJulius Center, University Medical Center, University of Utrecht, Utrecht, Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5613-242X
Augustinus SchrijversJulius Center, University Medical Center, University of Utrecht, Utrecht, Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5480-5926
Albert BoonstraFaculty of Economics and Business, University of Groningen, Groningen, Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3565-0623
Kit RoesRadboudumc, University of Nijmegen, Nijmegen, Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6775-1963

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundNumerous publications show that electronic medical records (EMRs) may make an important contribution to increasing the quality of care. There are indications that particularly the medical specialist plays an important role in the use of EMRs in hospitals.

objectiveThe aim of this study was to examine how, and by which aspects, the relationship between EMR use and the quality of care in hospitals is influenced according to medical specialists.

methodsTo answer this question, a qualitative study was conducted in the period of August-October 2018. Semistructured interviews of around 90 min were conducted with 11 medical specialists from 11 different Dutch hospitals. For analysis of the answers, we used a previously published taxonomy of factors that can influence the use of EMRs.

resultsThe professional experience of the participating medical specialists varied between 5 and 27 years. Using the previously published taxonomy, these medical specialists considered technical barriers the most significant for EMR use. The suboptimal change processes surrounding implementation were also perceived as a major barrier. A final major problem is related to the categories "social" (their relationships with the patients and fellow care providers), "psychological" (based on their personal issues, knowledge, and perceptions), and "time" (the time required to select, implement, and learn how to use EMR systems and subsequently enter data into the system). However, the medical specialists also identified potential technical facilitators, particularly in the assured availability of information to all health care professionals involved in the care of a patient. They see promise in using EMRs for medical decision support to improve the quality of care but consider these possibilities currently lacking.

conclusionsThe 11 medical specialists shared positive experiences with EMR use when comparing it to formerly used paper records. The fact that involved health care professionals can access patient data at any time they need is considered important. However, in practice, potential quality improvement lags as long as decision support cannot be applied because of the lack of a fully coded patient record.

Indexed as

electronic medical record (emr)health carehospitalsmedical specialistquality

Identifiers

PMID34704955
PMCPMC8581752

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.