Literature DB >> 22402980

Family physicians' perceptions and use of electronic clinical decision support during the first year of implementation.

Annemie Heselmans1, Bert Aertgeerts, Peter Donceel, Siegfried Geens, Stijn Van de Velde, Dirk Ramaekers.   

Abstract

An electronic decision support system (the EBMeDS system) was integrated in one of the Electronic Medical Records (EMR) of Belgian family physicians (Feb 2010). User acceptance of the system is considered as a necessary condition for the effective implementation of any IT project. Facilitators, barriers and issues of non-acceptance need to be understood in view of a successful implementation and to minimize unexpected adoption behavior. Objectives of the study were the assessment of users' perceptions towards the recently implemented EBMeDS system, the investigation of user-interactions with the system and possible relationships between perceptions and use. A mixed evaluation approach was performed consisting of a qualitative and a quantitative analysis. The technology acceptance model of UTAUT was used as a structural model for the development of our questionnaire to identify factors that may account for acceptance and use of the EBMeDS system (seven-point Likert scales). A quantitative analysis of computer-recorded user interactions with the system was performed for an evaluation period of 3 months to assess the actual use of the system. Qualitative and quantitative analysis were linked to each other. Thirty-nine family physicians (12 %) completed the survey. The majority of respondents (66 %) had a positive attitude towards the system in general. Mean intention to keep using the system was high (5,91 ± 1,33). Their perception of the ease of use of the system (mean 5,04 ± 1,41), usefulness (mean 4,69 ± 1,35) and facilitating conditions (4,43 ± 1,13) was in general positive. Only 0,35 % of reminders were requested on demand, the other 99,62 % of reminders displayed automatically. Detailed guidelines (long) were requested for 0,47 % of reminders automatically shown versus 16,17 % of reminders on request. The script behind the reminders was requested for 8,4 % of reminders automatically shown versus 13,6 % of reminders on request. The majority of respondents demonstrated a relatively high degree of acceptance towards the EBMeDS system. Although the majority of respondents was in general positive towards the ease of use of the system, usefulness and facilitating conditions, part of the statements gave rather mixed results and could be identified as important points of interest for future implementation initiatives and system improvements. It has to be stressed that our population consisted of a convenience sample of early adopters, willing to answer a questionnaire. The willingness to adopt the system depends on the willingness to use ICPC coding. As such, the quality of reminding partly depends on the quality of coding. There is a need to reach a larger population of physicians (including physicians who never used the system or stopped using the system) to validate the results of this survey.

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22402980     DOI: 10.1007/s10916-012-9841-3

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Med Syst        ISSN: 0148-5598            Impact factor:   4.460


  14 in total

1.  General practitioners' perceptions of the pharmaceutical decision-support tools in their prescribing software.

Authors:  Michael D Ahearn; Stephen J Kerr
Journal:  Med J Aust       Date:  2003-07-07       Impact factor: 7.738

2.  Ten commandments for effective clinical decision support: making the practice of evidence-based medicine a reality.

Authors:  David W Bates; Gilad J Kuperman; Samuel Wang; Tejal Gandhi; Anne Kittler; Lynn Volk; Cynthia Spurr; Ramin Khorasani; Milenko Tanasijevic; Blackford Middleton
Journal:  J Am Med Inform Assoc       Date:  2003-08-04       Impact factor: 4.497

3.  Selecting, presenting and delivering clinical guidelines: are there any "magic bullets"?

Authors:  Martin P Eccles; Jeremy M Grimshaw
Journal:  Med J Aust       Date:  2004-03-15       Impact factor: 7.738

Review 4.  Effects of computerized clinical decision support systems on practitioner performance and patient outcomes: a systematic review.

Authors:  Amit X Garg; Neill K J Adhikari; Heather McDonald; M Patricia Rosas-Arellano; P J Devereaux; Joseph Beyene; Justina Sam; R Brian Haynes
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2005-03-09       Impact factor: 56.272

5.  Overriding of drug safety alerts in computerized physician order entry.

Authors:  Heleen van der Sijs; Jos Aarts; Arnold Vulto; Marc Berg
Journal:  J Am Med Inform Assoc       Date:  2005-12-15       Impact factor: 4.497

6.  Practice based, longitudinal, qualitative interview study of computerised evidence based guidelines in primary care.

Authors:  Nikki Rousseau; Elaine McColl; John Newton; Jeremy Grimshaw; Martin Eccles
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2003-02-08

7.  Effects of computer-based clinical decision support systems on clinician performance and patient outcome. A critical appraisal of research.

Authors:  M E Johnston; K B Langton; R B Haynes; A Mathieu
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  1994-01-15       Impact factor: 25.391

8.  Are we setting about improving the safety of computerised prescribing in the right way? A workshop report.

Authors:  Arash Vaziri; Eric Connor; Ian Shepherd; Robert Treharne Jones; Tom Chan; Simon de Lusignan
Journal:  Inform Prim Care       Date:  2009

9.  Effectiveness of electronic guideline-based implementation systems in ambulatory care settings - a systematic review.

Authors:  Annemie Heselmans; Stijn Van de Velde; Peter Donceel; Bert Aertgeerts; Dirk Ramaekers
Journal:  Implement Sci       Date:  2009-12-30       Impact factor: 7.327

10.  Barriers to implementation of a computerized decision support system for depression: an observational report on lessons learned in "real world" clinical settings.

Authors:  Madhukar H Trivedi; Ella J Daly; Janet K Kern; Bruce D Grannemann; Prabha Sunderajan; Cynthia A Claassen
Journal:  BMC Med Inform Decis Mak       Date:  2009-01-21       Impact factor: 2.796

View more
  21 in total

1.  Differences in Sociocognitive Beliefs between Involved and Noninvolved Employees during the Implementation of an Electronic Health Record System.

Authors:  Nicola Esther Stanczyk; Rik Crutzen; Nikki Sewuster; Elwin Schotanus; Merijn Mulders; Henricus Paul Cremers
Journal:  Perspect Health Inf Manag       Date:  2017-04-01

2.  Decision Support for Diabetes in Scotland: Implementation and Evaluation of a Clinical Decision Support System.

Authors:  Nicholas Conway; Karen A Adamson; Scott G Cunningham; Alistair Emslie Smith; Peter Nyberg; Blair H Smith; Ann Wales; Deborah J Wake
Journal:  J Diabetes Sci Technol       Date:  2017-09-14

3.  Patient-specific computer-based decision support in primary healthcare--a randomized trial.

Authors:  Tiina Kortteisto; Jani Raitanen; Jorma Komulainen; Ilkka Kunnamo; Marjukka Mäkelä; Pekka Rissanen; Minna Kaila
Journal:  Implement Sci       Date:  2014-01-20       Impact factor: 7.327

4.  Use of Mobile Clinical Decision Support Software by Junior Doctors at a UK Teaching Hospital: Identification and Evaluation of Barriers to Engagement.

Authors:  Rakesh Patel; William Green; Muhammad Waseem Shahzad; Chris Larkin
Journal:  JMIR Mhealth Uhealth       Date:  2015-08-13       Impact factor: 4.773

5.  Comparative evaluation of different medication safety measures for the emergency department: physicians' usage and acceptance of training, poster, checklist and computerized decision support.

Authors:  Brita Sedlmayr; Andrius Patapovas; Melanie Kirchner; Anja Sonst; Fabian Müller; Barbara Pfistermeister; Bettina Plank-Kiegele; Renate Vogler; Manfred Criegee-Rieck; Hans-Ulrich Prokosch; Harald Dormann; Renke Maas; Thomas Bürkle
Journal:  BMC Med Inform Decis Mak       Date:  2013-07-29       Impact factor: 2.796

6.  EBMPracticeNet: A Bilingual National Electronic Point-Of-Care Project for Retrieval of Evidence-Based Clinical Guideline Information and Decision Support.

Authors:  Stijn Van de Velde; Robert Vander Stichele; Benjamin Fauquert; Siegfried Geens; Annemie Heselmans; Dirk Ramaekers; Ilkka Kunnamo; Bert Aertgeerts
Journal:  JMIR Res Protoc       Date:  2013-07-10

7.  Feasibility and impact of an evidence-based electronic decision support system for diabetes care in family medicine: protocol for a cluster randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  Annemie Heselmans; Stijn Van de Velde; Dirk Ramaekers; Robert Vander Stichele; Bert Aertgeerts
Journal:  Implement Sci       Date:  2013-08-05       Impact factor: 7.327

8.  Barriers and facilitators to the uptake of computerized clinical decision support systems in specialty hospitals: protocol for a qualitative cross-sectional study.

Authors:  Lorenzo Moja; Elisa Giulia Liberati; Laura Galuppo; Mara Gorli; Marco Maraldi; Oriana Nanni; Giulio Rigon; Pietro Ruggieri; Francesca Ruggiero; Giuseppe Scaratti; Alberto Vaona; Koren Hyogene Kwag
Journal:  Implement Sci       Date:  2014-08-28       Impact factor: 7.327

9.  Analysis of the factors influencing healthcare professionals' adoption of mobile electronic medical record (EMR) using the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology (UTAUT) in a tertiary hospital.

Authors:  Seok Kim; Kee-Hyuck Lee; Hee Hwang; Sooyoung Yoo
Journal:  BMC Med Inform Decis Mak       Date:  2016-01-30       Impact factor: 2.796

10.  User perspectives on an electronic decision-support tool performing comprehensive medication reviews - a focus group study with physicians and nurses.

Authors:  Tuomas Koskela; Saana Sandström; Joonas Mäkinen; Helena Liira
Journal:  BMC Med Inform Decis Mak       Date:  2016-01-22       Impact factor: 2.796

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.