Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39627780›Full record

ArticleBMC medical informatics and decision making2024

Patient and caregiver perceptions of electronic health records interoperability in the NHS and its impact on care quality: a focus group study.

Edmond Li, Olivia Lounsbury, Jonathan Clarke, Hutan Ashrafian, Ara Darzi, Ana Luisa Neves

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medical informatics and decision making, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 2 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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. 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

6 authors.

Edmond LiNorth West London NIHR Patient Safety Research Collaboration, Institute of Global Health Innovation, Imperial College London, Room 1035/7, QEQM Wing, St Mary's Campus, London, W2 1NY, UK. edmond.li19@imperial.ac.uk.
Olivia LounsburyDepartment of Surgical Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Jonathan ClarkeNorth West London NIHR Patient Safety Research Collaboration, Institute of Global Health Innovation, Imperial College London, Room 1035/7, QEQM Wing, St Mary's Campus, London, W2 1NY, UK.
Hutan AshrafianNorth West London NIHR Patient Safety Research Collaboration, Institute of Global Health Innovation, Imperial College London, Room 1035/7, QEQM Wing, St Mary's Campus, London, W2 1NY, UK.
Ara DarziNorth West London NIHR Patient Safety Research Collaboration, Institute of Global Health Innovation, Imperial College London, Room 1035/7, QEQM Wing, St Mary's Campus, London, W2 1NY, UK.
Ana Luisa NevesNorth West London NIHR Patient Safety Research Collaboration, Institute of Global Health Innovation, Imperial College London, Room 1035/7, QEQM Wing, St Mary's Campus, London, W2 1NY, UK.

Funding

NRSA Training CoreTL1TR002016 · NCATS · PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV HERSHEY MED CTR · PI THOMAS, GAIL D. · 2016 to 2025
$3.4M
Patient Safety Translational Research Centre PSTRC-2016-004Wellcome Trust
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe proliferation of electronic health records (EHR) in health systems of many high-income countries has ushered in profound changes to how clinical information is used, stored, and disseminated. For patients, being able to easily access and share their health information electronically through interoperable EHRs can often impact safety and their experience when seeking care across healthcare providers. While extensive research exists examining how EHRs affected workflow and technical challenges such as limited interoperability, much of it was done from the viewpoint of healthcare staff rather than from patients themselves. This leaves a critical knowledge gap in our evidence base to inform better implementation of health information technologies which needs addressing. AIMS AND

objectivesThis study aimed to explore how patients with chronic conditions or polypharmacy and their caregivers perceive the current state of EHR interoperability, identify instances where it was associated with negative health outcomes, and elucidate patient-driven recommendations to address concerns raised.

methodsA total of 18 patients and caregivers participated in five online focus groups between May-July 2022. Thematic analysis was performed to generate codes and derive higher-order themes.

resultsParticipants highlighted that EHR interoperability in the NHS does not meet patient needs and expectations. While patients' understanding of the concept of EHR interoperability was mixed, most were able to describe how the inability to seamlessly share health information within EHR has negatively impacted care. Limited interoperability contributed to inaccurate medical records, perpetuated existing incorrect information, impaired clinical decision-making, and often required patients to resort to using workarounds. Patients also voiced ideas for potential solutions for consideration. These included a move towards a one-centralised system approach, strengthening data security measures to augment other efforts to increase interoperability, prioritising health information technology training for NHS staff, and involving more allied health professionals and patients themselves in the EHR data curation process.

conclusionOur study contributes to the existing body of literature by providing the perspectives of patients and carers most likely to encounter interoperability challenges and therefore those most ideally positioned to propose potential solutions. As highlighted by patients, researchers and policymakers should consider social, educational, and organisational solutions, in addition to technical solutions. Lack of interoperability (i.e., the ability to share a patient's health information electronically between healthcare providers) can affect the quality of care received. However, much of the existing research was done from the viewpoint of healthcare staff rather than from patients themselves. This study explored the views of patients regarding what they feel interoperability in the NHS is currently like, how they think it affects their care, and what they think can be done to improve it. Patients reported interoperability to often be poor. It caused inconvenience both to themselves and their healthcare provider, and negatively impacted their experience getting care overall. Patient suggestions for improvement included centralising and reducing the number of existing systems, having more training for healthcare staff, and supporting patients and other healthcare staff in managing their health data.

Indexed as

CaregiversElectronic Health RecordsFocus GroupsQuality of Health CareState MedicineAdultAgedFemaleHealth Information InteroperabilityHumansMaleMiddle AgedPatientsElectronic health recordsFocus groupsHealth information exchangeInteroperabilityPatient involvementQualitative methods

Identifiers

PMID39627780
PMCPMC11616290

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.