Barriers That Impede the Adoption of Pediatric Information Technology
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Information technology (IT) is a critical but underused component of health care. Many factors contribute to the inconsistent adoption of IT. OBJECTIVE: To review the literature to better elucidate barriers that are likely to affect the adoption of IT by pediatric professionals. DATA SOURCES: Manuscripts were found using a MEDLINE search combining the terms medicine, information systems, and technology transfer. I also obtained references cited by relevant articles. Finally, I explored the Internet using http://www.google.com and http://www.northernlight.com. STUDY SELECTION: Articles discussing barriers or factors affecting the adoption of IT were considered for inclusion. Articles unrelated to clinical IT were excluded. DATA SYNTHESIS: A variety of barriers exist that affect the adoption of useful technologies. Situational barriers include challenges imposed by the current national health environment, financial and legal risks associated with technology purchasing and use, and access to technology. The most significant barrier is that pediatric health care practitioners may lack the knowledge or training to use IT effectively. CONCLUSIONS: Although some barriers exist that may be challenging to overcome, other barriers, such as the lack of knowledge about the uses of IT, are imminently solvable. Efforts to overcome these barriers should begin in earnest and should include educating stakeholders in the care of children and adolescents, as well as improving the knowledge about various technologies available to support pediatric and adolescent health care.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
A lack of clarity about accountability leading to confusion about who should be responsible for implementing changes could constitute a barrier.
“A lack of clarity about accountability leading to confusion about who should be responsible for implementing the changes could constitute a barrier [76].”
From Achieving change in primary care—causes of the evidence to practice gap: systematic reviews of reviews (2015) · cites this paper as [76]
Personal style, defined as the perceived fit between the intervention and the preferred style of clinical practice, personality, and philosophical opposition to the intervention, was presented exclusively as a barrier.
“Personal style, defined as the perceived fit between the intervention and the preferred style of clinical practice, such as clinicians’ communication style [78, 79], personality [54] and philosophical opposition to the intervention [69, 76], were presented exclusively as barriers.”
From Achieving change in primary care—causes of the evidence to practice gap: systematic reviews of reviews (2015) · cites this paper as [76]
Resistance to change caused by disagreement with the evidence, negative beliefs about the usefulness or added value of the intervention, or belief that the intervention was not part of their role were commonly described as a barrier to implementation.
“Resistance to change caused by disagreement with the evidence, negative beliefs about the usefulness or added value of the intervention or belief that the intervention was not part of their role were commonly described as a barrier to implementation [3, 14, 35, 41, 67–70, 76, 77, 80].”
From Achieving change in primary care—causes of the evidence to practice gap: systematic reviews of reviews (2015) · cites this paper as [76]
Implementing a new intervention usually required shifting organisational priorities and putting other projects on hold, which resulted in initial lower productivity and increased staff workload.
“implementing a new intervention usually required shifting organisational priorities and putting other projects on hold which resulted in initial lower productivity and increased staff workload [41, 76].”
From Achieving change in primary care—causes of the evidence to practice gap: systematic reviews of reviews (2015) · cites this paper as [76]
Cited by
Sorted by citations
The Impact of eHealth on the Quality and Safety of Health Care: A Systematic Overview
Black, A. D., Car, J., Pagliari, C., Anandan, C., Cresswell, K., Bokun, T., McKinstry, B., Procter, R., Majeed, A., & Sheikh, A. (2011) · PLoS Medicine · doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.1000387 · Cited by 1,442 · see citing works
Gagnon, M.-P., Desmartis, M., Labrecque, M., Car, J., Pagliari, C., Pluye, P., Frémont, P., Gagnon, J., Tremblay, N., & Légaré, F. (2012) · Journal of Medical Systems · doi:10.1007/s10916-010-9473-4 · Cited by 637 · see citing works
Mair, F. S., May, C., O’Donnell, C., Finch, T., Sullivan, F., & Murray, E. (2012) · Bulletin of the World Health Organization · doi:10.2471/blt.11.099424 · Cited by 553 · see citing works
Lau, R., Stevenson, F., Ong, B. N., Dziedzic, K., Treweek, S., Eldridge, S., Everitt, H., Kennedy, A., Qureshi, N., Rogers, A., et al. (2015) · Implementation Science · doi:10.1186/s13012-016-0396-4 · Cited by 533 · see citing works
“A lack of clarity about accountability leading to confusion about who should be responsible for implementing the changes could constitute a barrier [76].”
BackgroundInfluentialCosts and benefits of health information technology.
Shekelle, P. G., Morton, S. C., & Keeler, E. B. (2006) · doi:10.23970/ahrqepcerta132 · Cited by 501 · see citing works
Adoption of Electronic Health Records in Primary Care Pediatric Practices
Kemper, A. R., Uren, R. L., & Clark, S. J. (2006) · Pediatrics · doi:10.1542/peds.2005-3000 · Cited by 130 · see citing works
Rosenbloom, S. T., Harrell, F. E., Lehmann, C. U., Schneider, J. H., Spooner, S. A., & Johnson, K. B. (2006) · Pediatrics · doi:10.1542/peds.2005-3163 · Cited by 38 · see citing works
Self-citation
- Authors
- Johnson, K. B.
- Affiliations
- Johns Hopkins University (US)
- Corresponding author
- Johnson, Kevin B.
- ORCID
- Johnson, Kevin B.
- Venue
- Archives of Pediatrics & Adolescent Medicine
- Publisher
- American Medical Association (AMA)
- Published
- 2001-12-01
- Volume
- 155
- Issue
- 12
- Pages
- 1374
- ISSN
- 1072-4710 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W1996674515
- Cited by
- 66
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2021: 1 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 4 · 2014: 3 · 2013: 4 · 2012: 4
- FWCI
- 6.70
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Archives of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › Health Information Management › Electronic Health Records Systems
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Technology and Human Factors in Education and Health
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Information Systems and Management › Technology Adoption and User Behaviour
- Keywords
- information technology adoption, pediatric health care, technology adoption barriers, health information systems, technology transfer, access to technology
- MeSH terms
- Humans, Information Systems, Pediatrics, Technology Transfer, Biomedical Technology
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
