Physician and nurse satisfaction with an Electronic Medical Record system
Abstract
Electronic Medical Records (EMRs) are intended to support clinical activity, improve efficiency, and reduce error. Reluctance to use EMRs may exist among clinicians. The purpose of this study was to assess physician and nurse satisfaction with an Emergency Department (ED) EMR. We surveyed Emergency Medicine (EM) physicians and nurses at a large urban teaching hospital after implementation of an Emergency Department EMR. The questionnaire assessed: 1) computer background and experience; 2) perceptions regarding EMR use; and 3) concerns about impact upon quality of patient care. The clinicians find the EMR easy to use and are generally satisfied with the impact on their work. However, they report that the EMR has no positive impact on patient care. They report confusion in following the sequence of screens, and are concerned with the amount of time it takes to use the EMR and the confidentiality of patient information. Similar results were found between physicians and nurses. Nurses, but not physicians, report that they are able to finish work much faster than before implementation (p < 0.05). We were unable to correlate computer background and experience with satisfaction with an EMR. This survey suggests that EM physicians and nurses favor the use of an EMR and suggests opportunities for EMR enhancement.
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?
In accordance with existing literature, evidence of actual benefits reported in this study was limited to a number of clinically orientated benefits surrounding improved information availability, accessibility and legibility.
“In accordance with existing literature, evidence of actual benefits reported in our study were limited to a number of ‘clinically orientated’ benefits surrounding improved information availability, accessibility and legibility [19, 23, 31–34].”
From Exploring the implementation of an electronic record into a maternity unit: a qualitative study using Normalisation Process Theory (2017) · cites this paper as [23]
Existing literature on the benefits of electronic records is largely U.S. or primary care based and reports potential rather than actual benefits, with a large proportion of this evidence reporting the potential for electronic records to improve patient safety.
“Existing literature on the benefits of electronic records is largely U.S or primary care based [18–34] and reports ‘potential’ rather than actual benefits; with a large proportion of this evidence reporting the potential for electronic records to improve patient safety [19, 21, 23, 27–30].”
From Exploring the implementation of an electronic record into a maternity unit: a qualitative study using Normalisation Process Theory (2017) · cites this paper as [23]
Cites
(1979) · Medical Entomology and Zoology · Cited by 11,252 · see citing works
Quasi-experimentation: Design and analysis issues for field settings
Shrout, P. E. (1980) · Evaluation and Program Planning · doi:10.1016/0149-7189(80)90063-4 · Cited by 6,091 · see citing works
Hesselbart, S., & Fowler, F. J. (1985) · Journal of the American Statistical Association · doi:10.2307/2288598 · Cited by 4,767 · see citing works
If electronic medical records are so great, why aren't family physicians using them?
Loomis, G. A., Ries, J., Saywell, R. M., & Thakker, N. (2002) · PubMed · Cited by 192 · see citing works
Cork, R. D., Detmer, W. M., & Friedman, C. P. (1998) · Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association · doi:10.1136/jamia.1998.0050164 · Cited by 149 · see citing works
Electronic Medical Records: Are Physicians Ready?
Dansky, K. H., Gamm, L. D., Vasey, J. J., & Barsukiewicz, C. K. (1999) · Journal of Healthcare Management · doi:10.1097/00115514-199911000-00007 · Cited by 118 · see citing works
Sittig, D. F., Kuperman, G. J., & Fiskio, J. M. (1999) · PubMed · Cited by 100 · see citing works
Electronic medical records: the family practice resident perspective.
Aaronson, J. W., Murphy-Cullen, C. L., Chop, W. M., et al. (2001) · PubMed · Cited by 91 · see citing works
Evaluation of clinical information systems. What can be evaluated and what cannot?
Bürkle, T., Ammenwerth, E., Prokosch, H., & Dudeck, J. (2001) · Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice · doi:10.1046/j.1365-2753.2001.00291.x · Cited by 74 · see citing works
Kushniruk, A. W., Patel, C., Patel, V. L., & Cimino, J. J. (2001) · International Journal of Medical Informatics · doi:10.1016/s1386-5056(00)00133-7 · Cited by 53 · see citing works
Ohmann, C., Boy, O., & Yang, Q. (1997) · Studies in health technology and informatics · doi:10.3233/978-1-60750-887-8-781 · Cited by 15 · see citing works
Computerized Databases for Emergency Care: What Impact on Patient Care?
Pugh, G. E., & Tan, J. (1994) · Methods of Information in Medicine · doi:10.1055/s-0038-1635054 · Cited by 10 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
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
McGinn, C. A., Grenier, S., Duplantie, J., Shaw, N., Sicotte, C., Mathieu, L., Leduc, Y., Légaré, F., & Gagnon, M.-P. (2011) · BMC Medicine · doi:10.1186/1741-7015-9-46 · Cited by 393 · see citing works
Scantlebury, A., Sheard, L., Watt, I., Cairns, P., Wright, J., & Adamson, J. (2017) · BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making · doi:10.1186/s12911-016-0406-0 · Cited by 41 · see citing works
Accessibility versus confidentiality of information in the emergency department
Ayatollahi, H., Bath, P. A., & Goodacre, S. (2009) · Emergency Medicine Journal · doi:10.1136/emj.2008.070557 · Cited by 31 · see citing works
- Authors
- Likourezos, A., Chalfin, D. B., Murphy, D. G., Sommer, B., Darcy, K., & Davidson, S. J.
- Affiliations
- Maimonides Medical Center (US)
- Albert Einstein College of Medicine (US)
- Venue
- The Journal of Emergency Medicine
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2004-11
- Volume
- 27
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 419-424
- ISSN
- 0736-4679 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2140259790
- Cited by
- 174
- References
- 12
- Citations by year
- 2025: 1 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 7 · 2016: 13 · 2015: 17 · 2014: 13 · 2013: 12 · 2012: 10
- FWCI
- 16.44
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Journal of Emergency Medicine (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › Health Information Management › Electronic Health Records Systems
- Health Sciences › Nursing › Issues, ethics and legal aspects › Nursing Diagnosis and Documentation
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › Health Information Management › Medical Coding and Health Information
- Keywords
- electronic health records, provider satisfaction, emergency department, emergency physicians, emergency nursing, EMR usability, patient confidentiality, computer literacy, quality of care, workflow efficiency
- MeSH terms
- Adult, Cross-Sectional Studies, Emergency Medical Services, Emergency Service, Hospital, Female, Hospitals, Teaching, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Nurses, Personal Satisfaction, Physicians, Surveys and Questionnaires, Medical Records Systems, Computerized
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
