ArticleBMJ open2025
Exploring the impact of an electronic health record implementation on user experiences across clinical programmes in a large Canadian community hospital: a qualitative study.
Article in BMJ open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Examining Electronic Medical Record Migration in a Team-Based Primary Care Clinic: Case Study.JMIR formative research · 2026Article
- Why digital health fails silently: a sociotechnical theory of health information technology-related risk.Frontiers in digital health · 2026Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThis study explored experiences with implementing and using the Epic electronic health record (EHR) across different clinical programmes within a single Canadian hospital system and specifically examined how local configuration decisions and implementation of its features and functionalities integrated well or introduced friction within workflows.
designQualitative description methodology involving semistructured interviews analysed using thematic analysis.
settingA large community hospital in Canada.
participantsHealthcare providers, administrative staff and clinical leaders from seven clinical programmes.
results66 individuals participated in interviews. Participants described that Epic's implementation impacted communication and teamwork, workflow and efficiency, and patient care, with these impacts varying across different programme settings. Participants reported that Epic improved inpatient care and safety, communication and teamwork, workflow and efficiency. However, several programmes also experienced challenges, including information overload and increased clerical tasks, impacting workflow efficiency. In programmes with an outpatient component, such as surgery and oncology, there were additional difficulties, such as connecting with external partners, user interface complexities that hindered task completion and concerns about potential compromises in patient care quality.
conclusionHealth systems must consider the diverse needs of various clinical programmes when implementing an EHR. Customising the system interface and iteratively codesigning how health system staff incorporate the technology into their workflows are crucial to ensure an EHR seamlessly integrates across different settings, fosters high-quality care delivery and minimises user friction.
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.