Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40581989›Full record

ArticleJournal of evaluation in clinical practice2025

Usability Challenges in Electronic Health Records: Impact on Documentation Burden and Clinical Workflow: A Scoping Review.

Olufisayo Olakotan, Ray Samuriwo, Hadiza Ismaila, Samuel Atiku

Abstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of evaluation in clinical practice, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 33 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
33citing 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

33 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. 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.

Olufisayo OlakotanDepartment of Neonatology, Women and Children's Directorate, University Hospitals Leicester NHS Trust, Leicester, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-1999-5135
Ray SamuriwoSchool of Health and Social Care, Edinburgh Napier University, Sighthill Campus, Sighthill Court, Edinburgh, Scotland, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-5954-0501
Hadiza IsmailaCentre for Digital Innovations in Health and Social Care (CDIHSC), Faculty of Health Studies, University of Bradford; Bradford, England, UK.
Samuel AtikuDigital Technology and Innovation, University of Staffordshire, UK.

Funding

The authors received no specific funding for this work.
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe adoption of Electronic Health Records (EHRs) has become integral to today's healthcare by supporting preventive care; however, it often imposes significant documentation burdens that disrupt workflows. These challenges may stem from usability issues driven by system or interface design flaws that result in the misalignment of EHR with clinical workflows, increasing clinicians' cognitive load. This study aims to identify and analyze the usability issues contributing to documentation burdens and subsequently lead to workflow disruptions.

methodsThe scoping review employed the methodology developed by Levac. Three databases, namely PubMed, Scopus, and Ovid MEDLINE, were searched to identify relevant studies published in English between 2007 and 2024. Handsearching of key journals was also conducted to ensure comprehensive coverage of the literature. All findings were reported according to PRISMA guidelines for scoping reviews.

resultsOf 2387 identified records, only 28 studies met the inclusion criteria, employing qualitative, mixed methods as well as time-motion studies. The studies noted that clinicians frequently experienced significant workflow disruptions caused by poorly designed interfaces, which led to task-switching, excessive and prolonged screen navigation, and fragmented critical information across EHR. These challenges often necessitated workarounds, such as duplicating documentation and using external tools, further increasing the risk of data entry errors and prolonging documentation times.

conclusionOur study findings highlight the critical need for improved EHR design that minimises workflow disruptions associated with documentation burden. Addressing these challenges requires human factors approach that streamlines information retrieval, optimizes interface usability, and eliminates unnecessary task complexity.

Indexed as

DocumentationElectronic Health RecordsWorkflowHumansUser-Computer Interfaceclinical workflowdata entrydocumentation burdenelectronic health recordsinterface usability

Identifiers

PMID40581989
PMCPMC12206486

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.