| Literature DB >> 26231051 |
Binyam Tilahun1, Fleur Fritz2.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: With the increasing implementation of Electronic Medical Record Systems (EMR) in developing countries, there is a growing need to identify antecedents of EMR success to measure and predict the level of adoption before costly implementation. However, less evidence is available about EMR success in the context of low-resource setting implementations. Therefore, this study aims to fill this gap by examining the constructs and relationships of the widely used DeLone and MacLean (D&M) information system success model to determine whether it can be applied to measure EMR success in those settings.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2015 PMID: 26231051 PMCID: PMC4522063 DOI: 10.1186/s12911-015-0192-0
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Med Inform Decis Mak ISSN: 1472-6947 Impact factor: 2.796
Fig. 1Constructs and hypothesis (H1-H12) of the updated D&M model and the mediating effect of computer literacy in the relationship between service quality and EMR use as well as between service quality and user satisfaction
Evaluation of the measurement constructs reliability
| Variable | Item | Abbr | SD | CR | AVE | C α |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| System Quality | SmartCare is easy to use | SQ1 | 0.89 | 0.84 | 0.68 | 0.84 |
| SmartCare is user friendly | SQ2 | 0.76 | ||||
| I find it easy to get SmartCare to do what I want it to do | SQ3 | 0.71 | ||||
| The response time of SmartCare is acceptable | SQ4 | 0.88 | ||||
| Information quality | SmartCare provides sufficient information to enable you to do your tasks | IQ1 | 0.73 | 0.91 | 0.74 | 0.89 |
| I am satisfied with the accuracy of SmartCare | IQ2 | 0.86 | ||||
| SmartCare generate complete report | IQ3 | 0.84 | ||||
| With SmartCare, I am able to access the information I need in time | IQ4 | 0.91 | ||||
| The reports from other departments are in the format of my need. | IQ5 | 0.83 | ||||
| Service Quality | SmartCare is dependable | SQ1 | 0.86 | 0.89 | 0.73 | 0.85 |
| My supervisor has been helpful in the use of SmartCare. | SQ2 | 0.87 | ||||
| The available user guides and help function is helpful | SQ3 | 0.79 | ||||
| I can access computers in the ward when I need them | SQ4 | 0.91 | ||||
| The generator automatically backs up power losses | SQ5 | 0.87 | ||||
| The support from Tulane is timely. | SQ6 | 0.77 | ||||
| The reported bugs on the software get fixed in acceptable time frame | SQ& | 0.74 | ||||
| Use | I frequently use SmartCare for my tasks | Use1 | 0.88 | 0.91 | 0.76 | 0.91 |
| I am dependent on SmartCare for my task | Use2 | 0.93 | ||||
| User Satisfaction | I can finish my task faster with SmartCare | US1 | 0.89 | 0.89 | 0.69 | 0.86 |
| SmartCare improves my productivity | US2 | 0.81 | ||||
| SmartCare has positive impact on quality of my task | US3 | 0.78 | ||||
| Overall I am satisfied with SmartCare | US4 | 0.81 | ||||
| Perceived net-benefit | I expect SmartCare to make the patient care faster | PN1 | 0.95 | 0.95 | 0.79 | 0.84 |
| I expect SmartCare to increase my effectiveness | PN2 | 0.93 | ||||
| I expect SmartCare to make the hospital service better | PN3 | 0.91 | ||||
| Computer literacy | I am interested in working with computers | CA1 | 0.94 | 0.96 | 0.81 | 0.91 |
| I have moderate skill in using computers | CA2 | 0.93 | ||||
| I take computer trainings in the hospital | CA3 | 0.89 | ||||
| I am playful in technology | CA4 | 0.91 | ||||
| I feel that using computers will support me to be more efficient in the future | CA5 | 0.96 |
SD = Standard loading, CR = Composite reliability C α = Cronbach’s α AVE = Average variance extracted
(Relative) frequencies of socio-demographic characteristics of the study participants including age, sex, work experience, professional category and IT course attendance
| Socio-demographic characteristics | Absolute frequency | Relative frequency (%) |
|---|---|---|
| Age of respondents | ||
| < 30 | 134 | 40.4 % |
| 31-40 | 111 | 33.4 % |
| 41-50 | 66 | 19.9 % |
| > 50 | 21 | 6.3 % |
| Sex | ||
| Male | 179 | 53.9 % |
| Female | 153 | 46.1 % |
| Work experience in current hospital | ||
| < 5 years | 132 | 39.8 % |
| 5-15 years | 148 | 44.6 % |
| > 15 years | 50 | 15.5 % |
| Professional category | ||
| Physicians | 83 | 25.0 % |
| Nurses | 176 | 53.0 % |
| Lab&Pharmacists | 73 | 22.0 % |
| IT course | ||
| No IT course | 98 | 29.5 % |
| Basic course | 165 | 49.7 % |
| Advanced training | 69 | 20.8 % |
Results of structural equation modeling in AMOS with the path coefficients for all of the 12 Hypotheses
| Path | β | t-statistics | Supported? |
|---|---|---|---|
| System quality → EMR Use ( | 0.32 | 3.12* | yes |
| System quality → User satisfaction ( | 0.53 | 5.40** | yes |
| Information quality → EMR use ( | 0.44 | 3.76* | yes |
| Information quality → User satisfaction ( | 0.48 | 4.65** | yes |
| Service Quality → EMR Use ( | 0.36 | 3.46* | yes |
| Service Quality → User satisfaction ( | 0.56 | 7.26** | yes |
| EMR Use → User satisfaction ( | 0.04 | 0.83 | no |
| User satisfaction → EMR use ( | 0.41 | 3.83* | yes |
| EMR Use → Perceived net-benefit ( | 0.31 | 4.79** | yes |
| User satisfaction → Perceived net-benefit ( | 0.60 | 8.22** | yes |
Goodness of fit χ 2/d.f. = 2.39, GFI =0 .92, AGFI =0 .87, NFI = 0.92, RMSR = .056. * p < .05. P < 0.05,** < 0.01
Mediating effect of computer literacy in the relationship between service quality and EMR use as well as service quality and user satisfaction
| Relationship | Moderator | β1 | β2 | t-stat | Supported? |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Service quality → EMR use ( | Computer literacy | 0.53 | 0.55 | 6.40* | yes |
| Service Quality → User satisfaction ( | Computer literacy | 0.82 | 0.61 | 7.11** | yes |
* p < .05. P < 0.05,** < 0.01