scholarly journals Staff expectations for the implementation of an electronic health record system: A qualitative study using Normalisation Process Theory

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Carolyn Mccrorie ◽  
Jonathan Benn ◽  
Owen Johnson ◽  
Arabella Scantlebury

Abstract Background Global evidence suggests a range of benefits for introducing electronic health record (EHR) systems to improve patient care. However, implementing EHR within healthcare organisations is complex and in the United Kingdom (UK), uptake has been slow. More research is needed to explore factors influencing successful implementation. This study explored staff expectations for change and outcome following procurement of a commercial EHR system by a large academic acute NHS hospital in the UK. Methods Qualitative interviews were conducted with 14 members of hospital staff who represented a variety of user groups across different specialities within the hospital. The four components of Normalisation Process Theory (Coherence, Cognitive participation, Collective action and Reflexive monitoring) provided a theoretical framework to interpret and report study findings. Results Health professionals had a common understanding for the rationale for EHR implementation (Coherence). There was variation in willingness to engage with and invest time into EHR (Cognitive participation) at an individual, professional and organisational level. Collective action (whether staff feel able to use the EHR) was influenced by context and perceived user-involvement in EHR design and planning of the implementation strategy. When appraising EHR (Reflexive monitoring), staff anticipated short and long-term benefits. Staff perceived that quality and safety of patient care would be improved with EHR implementation, but that these benefits may not be immediate. Some staff perceived that use of the system may negatively impact patient care. The findings indicate that preparedness for EHR use could mitigate perceived threats to the quality and safety of care. Conclusions Health professionals looked forward to reaping the benefits from EHR use. Variations in level of engagement suggest early components of the implementation strategy were effective, and that more work was needed to involve users in preparing them for use. A clearer understanding as to how staff groups and services differentially interact with the EHR as they go about their daily work was required. The findings may inform other hospitals and healthcare systems on actions that can be taken prior to EHR implementation to reduce concerns for quality and safety of patient care and improve the chance of successful implementation.

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Carolyn Mccrorie ◽  
Jonathan Benn ◽  
Owen Johnson ◽  
Arabella Scantlebury

Abstract Background Global evidence suggests benefits of introducing electronic health record (EHR) systems to improve patient care. However, implementing EHR into healthcare organisations is complex and in the United Kingdom (UK), uptake has been slow. More research is needed to explore factors influencing successful implementation. This study explored staff expectations for change and outcome following procurement of a commercial EHR system by a large academic acute NHS hospital in the UK. Methods Qualitative interviews were conducted with 14 members of hospital staff who represented a variety of user groups across different specialities within the hospital. The four components of Normalisation Process Theory (Coherence, Cognitive participation, Collective action and Reflexive monitoring) provided a theoretical framework to interpret and report study findings. Results Health professionals had a common understanding for the rationale for EHR implementation (Coherence). There was variation in willingness to engage with and invest time into EHR (Cognitive participation) at an individual, professional and organisational level. Collective action (whether staff feel able to use EHR) was influenced by context and perceived user-involvement in EHR design and planning of the implementation strategy. When appraising EHR (Reflexive monitoring), staff anticipated short and long-term benefits. Staff perceived that quality and safety of patient care would be improved with EHR implementation, but that these benefits may not be immediate. Some staff perceived that use of the system may negatively impact patient care. The findings indicate that preparedness for EHR use could mitigate perceived threats to the quality and safety of care. Conclusions Health professionals looked forward to reaping the benefits from EHR use. Variations in level of engagement suggest early components of the implementation strategy were effective, and that more work was needed to involve users in preparing them for use. A clearer understanding as to how staff groups and services differentially interact with EHR as they go about their daily work was required. The findings may inform other hospitals and healthcare systems on actions that can be taken prior to EHR implementation to reduce concerns for quality and safety of patient care and improve the chance of successful implementation.


Author(s):  
Carolyn McCrorie ◽  
Jonathan Benn ◽  
Owen Ashby Johnson ◽  
Arabella Scantlebury

Abstract Background Global evidence suggests a range of benefits for introducing electronic health record (EHR) systems to improve patient care. However, implementing EHR within healthcare organisations is complex and, in the United Kingdom (UK), uptake has been slow. More research is needed to explore factors influencing successful implementation. This study explored staff expectations for change and outcome following procurement of a commercial EHR system by a large academic acute NHS hospital in the UK. Methods Qualitative interviews were conducted with 14 members of hospital staff who represented a variety of user groups across different specialities within the hospital. The four components of Normalisation Process Theory (Coherence, Cognitive participation, Collective action and Reflexive monitoring) provided a theoretical framework to interpret and report study findings. Results Health professionals had a common understanding for the rationale for EHR implementation (Coherence). There was variation in willingness to engage with and invest time into EHR (Cognitive participation) at an individual, professional and organisational level. Collective action (whether staff feel able to use the EHR) was influenced by context and perceived user-involvement in EHR design and planning of the implementation strategy. When appraising EHR (Reflexive monitoring), staff anticipated short and long-term benefits. Staff perceived that quality and safety of patient care would be improved with EHR implementation, but that these benefits may not be immediate. Some staff perceived that use of the system may negatively impact patient care. The findings indicate that preparedness for EHR use could mitigate perceived threats to the quality and safety of care. Conclusions Health professionals looked forward to reaping the benefits from EHR use. Variations in level of engagement suggest early components of the implementation strategy were effective, and that more work was needed to involve users in preparing them for use. A clearer understanding as to how staff groups and services differentially interact with the EHR as they go about their daily work was required. The findings may inform other hospitals and healthcare systems on actions that can be taken prior to EHR implementation to reduce concerns for quality and safety of patient care and improve the chance of successful implementation.


2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
carolyn mccrorie ◽  
Jonathan Benn ◽  
Owen Johnson ◽  
Arabella Scantlebury

Abstract Background Global evidence suggests benefits of introducing electronic patient record (EPR) systems to improve patient care. However, implementing EPR into healthcare organisations is complex and in the United Kingdom (UK), uptake has been slow. More research is needed to explore factors influencing successful implementation. This study explored staff expectations for change and outcome following procurement of an EPR system in a large academic acute NHS trust in the UK. Methods Qualitative interviews were conducted with 14 members of hospital staff who represented a variety of user groups across different specialities within an NHS hospital in England. The four components of Normalisation Process Theory (Coherence, Cognitive participation, Collective action and Reflexive monitoring) provided a theoretical framework to interpret and report study findings. Results Health professionals had a common understanding for the rationale for EPR implementation (Coherence). There was variation in willingness to engage with and invest time into EPR (Cognitive participation) at an individual, professional and organisational level. Collective action (whether staff feel able to use EPR) was influenced by context and perceived user-involvement in EPR design and planning of the implementation strategy. When appraising EPR (Reflexive monitoring), staff anticipated short and long-term benefits. Staff perceived that quality and safety of patient care would be improved with EPR implementation, but that these benefits may not be immediate. Some staff perceived use of the system during early implementation to negatively impact patient care. The findings indicate that preparedness for EPR use could mitigate perceived threats to the quality and safety of care. Conclusions Health professionals looked forward to reaping the benefits from EPR use. Variations in level of engagement suggest early components of the implementation strategy were effective, and that more work was needed to involve users in preparing them for use. A clearer understanding as to how staff groups and services differentially interact with EPR as they go about their daily work was required. The findings may inform other hospitals and healthcare systems on actions that can be taken prior to EPR implementation to reduce concerns for quality and safety of patient care and improve the chance of successful implementation.


2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ahmad Hidayat ◽  
Arief Hasani

The I-THS-1908, a big data electronic health record platform, is capable of establishing its capability as an electronic health record to tackle the large volume of data with high velocity and complex variety of patient data by providing the value to the patient care management and analytics. The further development of I-THS-1908 opens the opportunity to use the electronic health record for patient care management and analytics for all type of health conditions.


2011 ◽  
Vol 02 (04) ◽  
pp. 460-471 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. Skinner ◽  
J. Windle ◽  
L. Grabenbauer

SummaryObjective: The slow adoption of electronic health record (EHR) systems has been linked to physician resistance to change and the expense of EHR adoption. This qualitative study was conducted to evaluate benefits, and clarify limitations of two mature, robust, comprehensive EHR Systems by tech-savvy physicians where resistance and expense are not at issue.Methods: Two EHR systems were examined – the paperless VistA / Computerized Patient Record System used at the Veterans‘ Administration, and the General Electric Centricity Enterprise system used at an academic medical center. A series of interviews was conducted with 20 EHR-savvy multi-institutional internal medicine (IM) faculty and house staff. Grounded theory was used to analyze the transcribed data and build themes. The relevance and importance of themes were constructed by examining their frequency, convergence, and intensity.Results: Despite eliminating resistance to both adoption and technology as drivers of acceptance, these two robust EHR’s are still viewed as having an adverse impact on two aspects of patient care, physician workflow and team communication. Both EHR’s had perceived strengths but also significant limitations and neither were able to satisfactorily address all of the physicians’ needs.Conclusion: Difficulties related to physician acceptance reflect real concerns about EHR impact on patient care. Physicians are optimistic about the future benefits of EHR systems, but are frustrated with the non-intuitive interfaces and cumbersome data searches of existing EHRs.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document