OBJECTIVE: To assess intensive care unit (ICU) nurses' acceptance of electronic health records (EHR) technology and examine the relationship between EHR design, implementation factors, and nurse acceptance. DESIGN: The authors analyzed data from two cross-sectional survey questionnaires distributed to nurses working in four ICUs at a northeastern US regional medical center, 3 months and 12 months after EHR implementation. MEASUREMENTS: Survey items were drawn from established instruments used to measure EHR acceptance and usability, and the usefulness of three EHR functionalities, specifically computerized provider order entry (CPOE), the electronic medication administration record (eMAR), and a nursing documentation flowsheet. RESULTS: On average, ICU nurses were more accepting of the EHR at 12 months as compared to 3 months. They also perceived the EHR as being more usable and both CPOE and eMAR as being more useful. Multivariate hierarchical modeling indicated that EHR usability and CPOE usefulness predicted EHR acceptance at both 3 and 12 months. At 3 months postimplementation, eMAR usefulness predicted EHR acceptance, but its effect disappeared at 12 months. Nursing flowsheet usefulness predicted EHR acceptance but only at 12 months. CONCLUSION: As the push toward implementation of EHR technology continues, more hospitals will face issues related to acceptance of EHR technology by staff caring for critically ill patients. This research suggests that factors related to technology design have strong effects on acceptance, even 1 year following the EHR implementation.
OBJECTIVE: To assess intensive care unit (ICU) nurses' acceptance of electronic health records (EHR) technology and examine the relationship between EHR design, implementation factors, and nurse acceptance. DESIGN: The authors analyzed data from two cross-sectional survey questionnaires distributed to nurses working in four ICUs at a northeastern US regional medical center, 3 months and 12 months after EHR implementation. MEASUREMENTS: Survey items were drawn from established instruments used to measure EHR acceptance and usability, and the usefulness of three EHR functionalities, specifically computerized provider order entry (CPOE), the electronic medication administration record (eMAR), and a nursing documentation flowsheet. RESULTS: On average, ICU nurses were more accepting of the EHR at 12 months as compared to 3 months. They also perceived the EHR as being more usable and both CPOE and eMAR as being more useful. Multivariate hierarchical modeling indicated that EHR usability and CPOE usefulness predicted EHR acceptance at both 3 and 12 months. At 3 months postimplementation, eMAR usefulness predicted EHR acceptance, but its effect disappeared at 12 months. Nursing flowsheet usefulness predicted EHR acceptance but only at 12 months. CONCLUSION: As the push toward implementation of EHR technology continues, more hospitals will face issues related to acceptance of EHR technology by staff caring for critically illpatients. This research suggests that factors related to technology design have strong effects on acceptance, even 1 year following the EHR implementation.
Authors: Jeffrey M Rothschild; Carol A Keohane; E Francis Cook; E John Orav; Elisabeth Burdick; Sarah Thompson; Judy Hayes; David W Bates Journal: Crit Care Med Date: 2005-03 Impact factor: 7.598
Authors: Jason J Saleem; William R Plew; Ross C Speir; Jennifer Herout; Nancy R Wilck; Dale Marie Ryan; Theresa A Cullen; Jean M Scott; Murielle S Beene; Toni Phillips Journal: Int J Med Inform Date: 2015-03-24 Impact factor: 4.046
Authors: Peter L T Hoonakker; Rebecca J Rankin; Jennifer C Passini; Jenny A Bunton; Bradley D Ehlenfeldt; Shannon M Dean; Anne S Thurber; Michelle M Kelly Journal: Appl Clin Inform Date: 2019-08-28 Impact factor: 2.342
Authors: Peter L T Hoonakker; Pascale Carayon; Roger L Brown; Randi S Cartmill; Tosha B Wetterneck; James M Walker Journal: J Am Med Inform Assoc Date: 2012-10-25 Impact factor: 4.497
Authors: Michelle M Kelly; Shannon M Dean; Pascale Carayon; Tosha B Wetterneck; Peter L T Hoonakker Journal: Appl Clin Inform Date: 2017-03-15 Impact factor: 2.342
Authors: Richard J Holden; Pascale Carayon; Ayse P Gurses; Peter Hoonakker; Ann Schoofs Hundt; A Ant Ozok; A Joy Rivera-Rodriguez Journal: Ergonomics Date: 2013-10-03 Impact factor: 2.778