Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35897157›Full record

ArticleJournal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA2022

Digital interventions for antimicrobial prescribing and monitoring: a qualitative meta-synthesis of factors influencing user acceptance.

Bethany A Van Dort, Jane E Carland, Jonathan Penm, Angus Ritchie, Melissa T Baysari

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
1.2field-weighted citation impact, top 16% of its field
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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Research synthesis as a strategy for advancing biomedical and health informatics knowledge.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2022
    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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Bethany A Van DortBiomedical Informatics and Digital Health, School of Medical Sciences, Charles Perkins Centre, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-0052-6400
Jane E CarlandDepartment of Clinical Pharmacology and Toxicology, St Vincent's Hospital Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Jonathan PenmSchool of Pharmacy, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Angus RitchieHealth Informatics Unit, Sydney Local Health District, Camperdown, New South Wales, Australia.
Melissa T BaysariBiomedical Informatics and Digital Health, School of Medical Sciences, Charles Perkins Centre, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-1645-9126
The University of Sydney · AUUNSW Sydney · AU

Funding

Australian Government Research
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo understand and synthesize factors influencing user acceptance of digital interventions used for antimicrobial prescribing and monitoring in hospitals. MATERIALS AND

methodsA meta-synthesis was conducted to identify qualitative studies that explored user acceptance of digital interventions for antimicrobial prescribing and/or monitoring in hospitals. Databases were searched and qualitative data were extracted and systematically classified using the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology (UTAUT) model.

resultsFifteen qualitative studies met the inclusion criteria. Eleven papers used interviews and four used focus groups. Most digital interventions evaluated in studies were decision support for prescribing (n = 13). Majority of perceptions were classified in the UTAUT performance expectancy domain in perceived usefulness and relative advantage constructs. Key facilitators in this domain included systems being trusted and credible sources of information, improving performance of tasks and increasing efficiency. Reported barriers were that interventions were not considered useful for all settings or patient conditions. Facilitating conditions was the second largest domain, which highlights the importance of users having infrastructure to support system use. Digital interventions were viewed positively if they were compatible with values, needs, and experiences of users.

conclusionsUser perceptions that drive users to accept and utilize digital interventions for antimicrobial prescribing and monitoring were predominantly related to performance expectations and facilitating conditions. To ensure digital interventions for antimicrobial prescribing are accepted and used, we recommend organizations ensure systems are evaluated and benefits are conveyed to users, that utility meets expectations, and that appropriate infrastructure is in place to support use.

Indexed as

Anti-Infective AgentsAnti-Bacterial AgentsEfficiencyHospitalsHumansQualitative ResearchAnti-Bacterial AgentsAnti-Infective Agentsantimicrobial prescribingclinical decision support systemsdigital interventionsqualitativeuser perceptionsUTAUT model

Identifiers

PMID35897157
PMCPMC9471701
OpenAlexW4288074756

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.