The DOI matches its Crossref record; 56 of the 57 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Adopting electronic medical records in primary care: Lessons learned from health information systems implementation experience in seven countries
Abstract
The adoption of health information systems is seen world wide as one method to mitigate the widening health care demand and supply gap. The purpose of this review was to identify the current state of knowledge about health information systems adoption in primary care. The goal was to understand factors and influencers affecting implementation outcomes from previous health information systems implementations experiences. A comprehensive systematic literature review of peer reviewed and grey literature was undertaken to identify the current state of knowledge regarding the implementation of health information systems. A total of 6 databases, 27 journal websites, 20 websites from grey sources, 9 websites from medical colleges and professional associations as well as 22 government/commission websites were searched. The searches returned almost 3700 article titles. Eighty-six articles met our inclusion and exclusion criteria. Articles show that systems' graphical user interface design quality, feature functionality, project management, procurement and users' previous experience affect implementation outcomes. Implementers had concerns about factors such as privacy, patient safety, provider/patient relations, staff anxiety, time factors, quality of care, finances, efficiency, and liability. The review showed that implementers can insulate the project from such concerns by establishing strong leadership, using project management techniques, establishing standards and training their staff to ensure such risks do not compromise implementation success. The review revealed the concept of socio-technical factors, or "fit" factors, that complicate health information systems deployment. The socio-technical perspective considers how the technical features of a health information system interact with the social features of a health care work environment. The review showed that quality of care, patient safety and provider/patient relations were not, positively or negatively, affected by systems implementation. The fact that no articles were found reviewing the benefits or drawbacks of health information systems accruing to patients should be concern to adopters, payers and jurisdictions. No studies were found that compared how provider-patient interactions in interviews are effected when providers used electronic health information systems as opposed to the paper equivalent. Very little information was available about privacy and liability.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
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?
In the citing paper
“A team-based partnership approach, collaborative efforts and good coordination between stakeholders and organisations were all shown to be important for implementation [34, 41, 55, 77].”
From Achieving change in primary care—causes of the evidence to practice gap: systematic reviews of reviews (2015) · cites this paper as [77]
In the citing paper
“Non-clinical staff often had better knowledge of optimising processes compared to clinicians [77]”
From Achieving change in primary care—causes of the evidence to practice gap: systematic reviews of reviews (2015) · cites this paper as [77]
In the citing paper
“different members of the workforce brought different perspectives and skills to the implementation [77].”
From Achieving change in primary care—causes of the evidence to practice gap: systematic reviews of reviews (2015) · cites this paper as [77]
In the citing paper
“patient values and preferences [3, 33] and concerns about clinician-patient relationships [42, 77] impeded implementation”
From Achieving change in primary care—causes of the evidence to practice gap: systematic reviews of reviews (2015) · cites this paper as [77]
In the citing paper
“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 [77]
In the citing paper
“Previous personal experience in clinical practice or with the information system affected professional attitudes to a new system or intervention [54, 66, 77, 81].”
From Achieving change in primary care—causes of the evidence to practice gap: systematic reviews of reviews (2015) · cites this paper as [77]
In the citing paper
“Effective project management (e.g. using an incremental approach over time according to a strategic plan allowing a transition period between old and new system) was shown to facilitate implementation [77].”
From Achieving change in primary care—causes of the evidence to practice gap: systematic reviews of reviews (2015) · cites this paper as [77]
In the citing paper
“Incentives by government organisations and other external stakeholders may facilitate adoption by healthcare organisations [17, 18, 39, 48, 49].”
From Factors that influence the implementation of e-health: a systematic review of systematic reviews (an update) (2016) · cites this paper as [39]
In the citing paper
“Financial incentives include the provision of initial funds to cover upfront costs [49], financial sponsorship [39], reimbursements for adoption [19, 30, 31, 36], and pay-for-performance initiatives [24, 36, 37, 49].”
From Factors that influence the implementation of e-health: a systematic review of systematic reviews (an update) (2016) · cites this paper as [39]
In the citing paper
“Providing a period of transition in which end users can become familiar with and learn how to use new systems has been advocated [39, 50].”
From Factors that influence the implementation of e-health: a systematic review of systematic reviews (an update) (2016) · cites this paper as [39]
In the citing paper
“Incremental implementation strategies where features are made available to users according to a plan were cited as preferable to ‘big bang’ approaches to implementation within complex organisations [39, 49].”
From Factors that influence the implementation of e-health: a systematic review of systematic reviews (an update) (2016) · cites this paper as [39]
In the citing paper
“Our study was UK-based, although the challenge of implementing effective decision support for prescribing, and specifically the problem of alert fatigue, is international.12 24 50”
From ‘Too much, too late’: mixed methods multi-channel video recording study of computerized decision support systems and GP prescribing (2013) · cites this paper as [50]
In the citing paper
“Difficulties in eHealth implementation are international phenomena, with similar problems being widely reported [102-105].”
From Web-Based Interventions for Behavior Change and Self-Management: Potential, Pitfalls, and Progress (2012) · cites this paper as [105]
Citations
Cites
1 retracted
Nursing record systems: effects on nursing practice and healthcare outcomes.
Urquhart, C., Currell, R., Grant, M., & Hardiker, N. (2009) · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · doi:10.1002/14651858.cd002099.pub2 · Cited by 246
RetractedPharmacological interventions for somatoform disorders in adults
Kleinstäuber, M., Witthöft, M., Steffanowski, A., van Marwijk, H., Hiller, W., & Lambert, M. J. (2014) · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · doi:10.1002/14651858.cd010628.pub2 · Cited by 11,369
Garg, A. X., Adhikari, N. K. J., McDonald, H., Rosas-Arellano, M. P., Devereaux, P. J., Beyene, J., Sam, J., & Haynes, R. B. (2005) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.293.10.1223 · Cited by 2,936
Role of Computerized Physician Order Entry Systems in Facilitating Medication Errors
Koppel, R. (2005) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.293.10.1197 · Cited by 2,126
Safar, P. J., & Grenvik, A. N. A. (1971) · CHEST Journal · doi:10.1378/chest.59.5.535 · Cited by 1,995
Ash, J. S. (2003) · Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association · doi:10.1197/jamia.m1471 · Cited by 1,789
Han, Y. Y., Carcillo, J. A., Venkataraman, S. T., Clark, R. S. B., Watson, R. S., Nguyen, T. C., Bayir, H., & Orr, R. A. (2005) · Pediatrics · doi:10.1542/peds.2005-1287 · Cited by 1,149
Kh, S., & Friedemann, H. (1991) · PubMed · Cited by 462
Computer Technology and Clinical Work: Still Waiting for Godot
Wears, R. L., & Berg, M. (2005) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.293.10.1261 · Cited by 448
Electronic Health Record Use and the Quality of Ambulatory Care in the United States
Linder, J. A., Ma, J., Bates, D. W., Middleton, B., & Stafford, R. S. (2007) · Archives of Internal Medicine · doi:10.1001/archinte.167.13.1400 · Cited by 438
Poon, E. G., Blumenthal, D., Jaggi, T., Honour, M. M., Bates, D. W., & Kaushal, R. (2004) · Health Affairs · doi:10.1377/hlthaff.23.4.184 · Cited by 408
Cavicchi, C., & Vagnoni, E. (2006) · Journal of Cleaner Production · doi:10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2006.09.016 · Cited by 361
Pizziferri, L., Kittler, A. F., Volk, L. A., Honour, M. M., Gupta, S., Wang, S. J., Wang, T., Lippincott, M. F., Li, Q., & Bates, D. W. (2004) · Journal of Biomedical Informatics · doi:10.1016/j.jbi.2004.11.009 · Cited by 283
Categorizing the unintended sociotechnical consequences of computerized provider order entry
Ash, J. S., Sittig, D. F., Dykstra, R. H., Guappone, K., Carpenter, J. D., & Seshadri, V. (2007) · International Journal of Medical Informatics · doi:10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2006.05.017 · Cited by 267
Kaiser Permanente's experience of implementing an electronic medical record: a qualitative study
Scott, J. T., Rundall, T. G., Vogt, T. M., & Hsu, J. (2005) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.38638.497477.68 · Cited by 266
Garg, A. X., Adhikari, N. K. J., McDonald, H., Rosas-Arellano, M. P., Devereaux, P. J., Beyene, J., Sam, J., & Haynes, R. B. (2007) · Cited by 253
Use of an electronic medical record improves the quality of urban pediatric primary care.
Adams, W., Mann, A. M., & Bauchner, H. (2003) · Pediatrics · doi:10.1542/peds.111.3.626 · Cited by 211
Improving quality through effective implementation of information technology in healthcare
Ovretveit, J., Scott, T., Rundall, T. G., Shortell, S. M., & Brommels, M. (2007) · International Journal for Quality in Health Care · doi:10.1093/intqhc/mzm031 · Cited by 204
Getting physicians to accept new information technology: insights from case studies
Lapointe, L. (2006) · Canadian Medical Association Journal · doi:10.1503/cmaj.050281 · Cited by 203
Del Beccaro, M. A., Jeffries, H. E., Eisenberg, M. A., & Harry, E. D. (2006) · Pediatrics · doi:10.1542/peds.2006-0367 · Cited by 181
Wong, D. H. W., Gallegos, Y., Weinger, M. B., Clack, S., Slagle, J. M., & Anderson, C. T. (2003) · Critical Care Medicine · doi:10.1097/01.ccm.0000089637.53301.ef · Cited by 153
McInnes, D. K., Saltman, D. C., & Kidd, M. R. (2006) · The Medical Journal of Australia · doi:10.5694/j.1326-5377.2006.tb00479.x · Cited by 153
Lorenzi, N. M. (2002) · International Journal of Medical Informatics · doi:10.1016/s1386-5056(02)00105-3 · Cited by 150
The influence of electronic medical record usage on nonverbal communication in the medical interview
McGrath, J. M., Arar, N. H., & Pugh, J. A. (2007) · Health Informatics Journal · doi:10.1177/1460458207076466 · Cited by 107
Doebbeling, B. N., Chou, A. F., & Tierney, W. M. (2006) · Journal of General Internal Medicine · doi:10.1111/j.1525-1497.2006.00363.x · Cited by 100
Nursing Documentation Time During Implementation of an Electronic Medical Record
Korst, L. M., Eusebio-Angeja, A. C., Chamorro, T., Aydin, C. E., & Gregory, K. D. (2003) · JONA The Journal of Nursing Administration · doi:10.1097/00005110-200301000-00006 · Cited by 99
Impact of CPOE on Mortality Rates – Contradictory Findings, Important Messages
Talmon, J. L., Ash, J. S., Bates, D. W., Beuscart-Zéphir, M.-C., Duhamel, A., Elkin, P. L., Gardner, R. M., Geissbühler, A., & Ammenwerth, E. (2006) · Methods of Information in Medicine · doi:10.1055/s-0038-1634123 · Cited by 98
Ahmad, A., Teater, P., Bentley, T. D., Kuehn, L., Kumar, R. R., Thomas, A., & Mekhjian, H. S. (2002) · Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association · doi:10.1136/jamia.2002.0090016 · Cited by 94
Take Note(s): Differential EHR Satisfaction with Two Implementations under One Roof
O’Connell, R. T., Cho, C., Shah, N., Brown, K., & Shiffman, R. N. (2003) · Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association · doi:10.1197/jamia.m1409 · Cited by 93
Crosson, J. C. (2005) · The Annals of Family Medicine · doi:10.1370/afm.326 · Cited by 92
Sociotechnical Requirements Analysis for Clinical Systems
Pratt, W., Dourish, P., Shabot, M. M., & Reddy, M. (2003) · Methods of Information in Medicine · doi:10.1055/s-0038-1634346 · Cited by 91
Nurses’ use of online clinical evidence
Gosling, A. S., Westbrook, J. I., & Spencer, R. (2004) · Journal of Advanced Nursing · doi:10.1111/j.1365-2648.2004.03079.x · Cited by 85
Grieger, D. L., Cohen, S. H., & Krusch, D. A. (2007) · Journal of the American College of Surgeons · doi:10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2007.02.074 · Cited by 76
Extent and utilisation of computerisation in Australian general practice
Henderson, J., Britt, H. C., & Miller, G. C. (2006) · The Medical Journal of Australia · doi:10.5694/j.1326-5377.2006.tb00478.x · Cited by 61
Nowinski, C. J., Becker, S. M., Reynolds, K. S. E., Beaumont, J. L., Caprini, C., Hahn, E. A., Peres, A., & Arnold, B. J. (2006) · International Journal of Medical Informatics · doi:10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2006.05.016 · Cited by 51
Test the artefact—Develop the organization
Bossen, C. (2006) · International Journal of Medical Informatics · doi:10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2006.01.001 · Cited by 47
Hamilton, W. T., Round, A., Sharp, D., & Peters, T. J. (2003) · Europe PMC (PubMed Central) · Cited by 47
SNOMED CT: electronic health record enhances anesthesia patient safety.
Elevitch, F. R. (2005) · PubMed · Cited by 45
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 · cited 3×
“These concepts contend that there is a relationship [30,32,33] between the tools that facilitate the health care processes and the interpersonal interactions needed to carry out the day-today clinical tasks of a care facility [31].”
BackgroundUpperman, J. S., Staley, P., Friend, K., Benes, J., Dailey, J., Neches, W. H., & Wiener, E. S. (2005) · PEDIATRICS · doi:10.1542/peds.2004-0066 · Cited by 38
Electronic Medical Records: Lessons from Small Physician Practices
Miller, R. H., Sim, I., & Newman, J. (2003) · Cited by 35
Leveraging Information Technology Towards Enhancing Patient Care and a Culture of Safety in the U.S.
Garets, D. E., Handler, T., & Ball, M. J. (2003) · Methods of Information in Medicine · doi:10.1055/s-0038-1634376 · Cited by 33
Lessons learned during 15 years of clinical information system experience.
Miranda, D., Fields, W. L., & Lund, K. (2001) · PubMed · Cited by 32
Involving Users in the Implementation of an Imaging Order Entry System
Schuster, D. M. (2003) · Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association · doi:10.1197/jamia.m1208 · Cited by 28
Developing the electronic health record: what about patient safety?
Boaden, R., & Joyce, P. (2006) · Health Services Management Research · doi:10.1258/095148406776829103 · Cited by 25
Levick, D., Lukens, H. F., & Stillman, P. L. (2005) · PubMed · Cited by 19
Should clinical software be regulated?
Coiera, E. W. (2007) · The Medical Journal of Australia · doi:10.5694/j.1326-5377.2007.tb01071.x · Cited by 18
Protti, D. J., Edworthy, S. M., & Johansen, I. (2007) · PubMed · Cited by 16
Implementing an HIS project: everyday features and practicalities of NHS project work
Martin, D., Mariani, J. A., & Rouncefield, M. (2004) · Health Informatics Journal · doi:10.1177/1460458204048511 · Cited by 16
Computerized prescriber order-entry systems: evaluation, selection, and implementation
Gray, M. D., & Felkey, B. G. (2004) · American Journal of Health-System Pharmacy · doi:10.1093/ajhp/61.2.190 · Cited by 14
Lessons Learned from a Whole Hospital PACS Installation
Pilling, J. R. (2002) · Clinical Radiology · doi:10.1053/crad.2002.1076 · Cited by 12
EHRs fix everything--and nine other myths.
Trachtenbarg, D. E. (2007) · PubMed · Cited by 11
Implementation evaluation. HIM professionals share their experiences bringing health IT online.
Duggan, C. M. (2006) · PubMed · Cited by 9
Fenton, S. H., Amatayakul, M. K., & Work, M. (2006) · PubMed · Cited by 7
HIM Impact on EHRs: Newly Released Study Links HIM Professionals and Successful EHR Implementations
Fenton, S. H., Amatayakul, M. K., & Work, M. (2006) · Cited by 3
Change readiness research. A qualitative study of variations in participation.
Høstgaard, A. M. B. (2006) · PubMed · Cited by 2
Flagged first, then by citations
1 of the 57 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
The Technology Acceptance Model: Its past and its future in health care
Holden, R. J., & Karsh, B.-T. (2010) · Journal of Biomedical Informatics · doi:10.1016/j.jbi.2009.07.002 · Cited by 2,669
“For example, the common addition of variables related to compatibility between the health IT and clinical work processes in the reviewed studies [48,49,98,103,105, 106,109] is in line with growing interest in the concept of ‘‘fit” as a critical need for successful IT design [131,132], especially in health care [21,28,…”
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
“An additional 55 supplementary reviews provided context to the findings [68–122], aiding in their interpretation [123].”
BackgroundRoss, J., Stevenson, F., Lau, R., & Murray, E. (2016) · Implementation Science · doi:10.1186/s13012-016-0510-7 · Cited by 1,011
“…their implementation were reported as important implementation factors by the majority of studies across all e-health domains [15 – 19, 22 – 25, 27, 28, 30 – 33, 36, 38, 39, 41, 43, 47, 49, 51 – 54, 57], with some studies citing cost-related factors as the main barrier to implementation [49, 54].”
BackgroundInfluentialCresswell, K., & Sheikh, A. (2013) · International Journal of Medical Informatics · doi:10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2012.10.007 · Cited by 690
“The literature shows that a pragmatic assessment of the likely benefits and trade-offs needs to be conveyed to users as part of this, including anticipated timeframes [48,52,53].”
InfluentialMair, 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
Metadata
- Authors
- LUDWICK, D., & DOUCETTE, J.
- Affiliations
- University of Alberta (CA)
- ORCID
- DOUCETTE, J
- Venue
- International Journal of Medical Informatics
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2009-01
- Volume
- 78
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 22-31
- ISSN
- 1386-5056 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2005519248
- Cited by
- 668
- References
- 57
- Citations by year
- 2026: 4 · 2025: 15 · 2024: 21 · 2023: 35 · 2022: 30 · 2021: 38 · 2020: 40 · 2019: 43 · 2018: 55 · 2017: 50 · 2016: 46 · 2015: 56 · 2014: 57 · 2013: 46 · 2012: 41
- FWCI
- 64.50
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- International Journal of Medical Informatics (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › Health Information Management › Electronic Health Records Systems
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Management Information Systems › Information Systems Theories and Implementation
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Management Information Systems › ERP Systems Implementation and Impact
- Keywords
- electronic health records, health information systems, primary care, implementation outcomes, user interface design, project management, privacy concerns, patient safety, employee training, implementation barriers, cross-national comparison
- MeSH terms
- Humans, Medical Informatics, Primary Health Care, Risk Factors, Medical Records Systems, Computerized, Internationality
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
