Physicians’ Attitude towards Electronic Medical Record Systems: An Input for Future Implementers

Abstract

Background. Electronic medical record (EMR) systems offer the potential to improve health care quality by allowing physicians real-time access to patient healthcare information. The endorsement and usage of EMRs by physicians have a significant influence on other user groups in the healthcare system. As a result, the purpose of this study was to examine physicians’ attitudes regarding EMRs and identify the elements that may influence their attitudes. Method. An institutional-based cross-sectional study design supplemented with a qualitative study was conducted from March 1 to April 30, 2018, among a total of 403 physicians. A self-administered questionnaire was used to collect quantitative data. The validity of the prediction bounds for the dependent variable and the validity of the confidence intervals and P values for the parameters were measured with a value of less than 0.05 and 95 percent of confidence interval. For the supplementary qualitative study, data were collected using semistructured in-depth interviews from 11 key informants, and the data were analyzed using thematic analysis. Result. Physicians’ computer literacy (CI: 0.264, 0.713; P : 0001) and computer access at work (CI: 0.141, 0.533, P : 0.001) were shown to be favorable predictors of their attitude towards EMR system adoption. Another conclusion from this study was the inverse relationship between physicians’ prior EMR experience and their attitude about the system (CI: -0.517, -0.121; P : 0.002). Conclusion. According to the findings of this study, physicians’ attitudes regarding EMR were found moderate in the studied region. There was a favorable relationship between computer ownership, computer literacy, lack of EMR experience, participation in EMR training, and attitude towards EMR. Improving the aforementioned elements is critical to improving physicians’ attitudes regarding EMR.

Experience of Health Care Professionals Using Digital Tools in the Hospital: Qualitative Systematic Review

“…More than half (10/17,59%) of the studies reported on CDS tools, with 29% (5/17) of the studies investigating conventional CDS [ 62 , 63 , 66 , 67 , 71 ] and 29% (5/17) of the studies focusing on AI-based CDS [ 59 , 61 , 65 , 69 , 70 ]. Of the 17 studies, 6 (35%) focused on EHRs [ 58 , 60 , 64 , 68 , 73 , 74 ], whereas the remaining 1 (6%) study examined a remote patient-monitoring tool [ 72 ]. Of the 17 studies, 13 (76%) were solely based on qualitative individual semistructured interviews.…”

“…Of the 17 studies, the other 2 (12%) followed a mixed methods approach [ 61 , 64 ]. They conducted qualitative individual semistructured interviews and enriched their data with quantitative surveys using the 5-point Likert scale [ 66 , 74 ]. The studies were conducted in 26 different locations, with 6 (23%) studies conducted in the United States [ 58 , 59 , 62 , 65 , 68 , 70 ], 3 (12%) in the United Kingdom [ 67 , 68 , 71 ], 2 (8%) in Ireland [ 68 , 71 ], 2 (8%) in the Netherlands [ 69 , 72 ], and 2 (8%) in Australia [ 64 , 68 ].…”

“…The studies were conducted in 26 different locations, with 6 (23%) studies conducted in the United States [ 58 , 59 , 62 , 65 , 68 , 70 ], 3 (12%) in the United Kingdom [ 67 , 68 , 71 ], 2 (8%) in Ireland [ 68 , 71 ], 2 (8%) in the Netherlands [ 69 , 72 ], and 2 (8%) in Australia [ 64 , 68 ]. Furthermore, single studies were conducted in Europe, including Norway [ 73 ], Sweden [ 63 ], France [ 71 ], Italy [ 71 ], Spain [ 71 ], and Portugal [ 71 ]; Canada [ 60 ]; Asia, including the United Arab Emirates [ 68 ], China [ 66 ], and Malaysia [ 61 ]; and Ethiopia in Eastern Africa [ 74 ] (1/26, 4%; Table 1 ; Figure 2 ).…”

“…Of the 17 identified studies, most focused on CDS systems, including 5 (29%) on conventional CDS systems [ 62 , 63 , 66 , 67 , 71 ] and 5 (29%) on AI-based CDS systems [ 59 , 61 , 65 , 69 , 70 ]. Moreover, 6 (35%) out of 17 studies focused on EHR systems [ 58 , 60 , 64 , 68 , 73 , 74 ], and 1 (6%) study focused on a remote patient-monitoring device [ 72 ], which did not fit into any of the 3 broader categories ( Table 3 ).…”

Health Professionals' Attitudes and Factors Influencing the Implementation of Electronic Medical Records: A Multicenter Cross-sectional Study in Ethiopia, 2023

“…Health professionals who had computer literacy, had 2.7 times more favorable attitude to EMR implementation as compared to those who had no computer literacy (AOR: 2.66; 95% CI: 1.16-6.09) and having good knowledge for EMR had 1.8 times more likelihood to have favorable attitude to EMR as compared to having poor knowledge (AOR: 1.8; 95% CI: 1.10-2.96) (Table 5). 20); computer access (10); hospital lack of management commitment and poor network had signi cant association with attitude status of health professionals towards EMR implementation. The difference might be due to management concern and commitment difference, budget difference among health institutions.…”