A qualitative analysis of the impact of Electronic Health Records (EHR) on healthcare quality and safety: clinicians’ lived experiences
Open accessAbstract
Purpose: There have been mixed findings of clinicians' perceptions of Electronic Health Record (EHR). This study aims to explore the lived experiences of clinicians, to assess the role of EHR in improving the quality and safety of healthcare. Basic Procedures: A qualitative study design was used. We collected the opinions from different groups of clinicians (physicians, hospitalists, nurse practitioners, nurses, and patient safety officers) using semi-structured interviews. Organizations represented were trauma hospitals, academic medical centers, medical clinics, home health centers, and small hospitals. Main findings: Our study found clinicians' ambivalent assessments toward EHR, which confirms extant literature. We compared the responses by job roles and found that nurses were positive about improving efficiency with EHR while others regarded EHR as time-consuming. While many underscored the importance of EHR in avoiding medical errors by improving data accessibility, nurses had concerns regarding data accuracy. Interoperability appeared to be a concern given limited system integration. Principal conclusions: Lived experiences of clinicians further tease out the mixed views about the effectiveness of EHR and highlight the challenges in EHR implementation. Redesigning the EHR and improving its implementation process may be potential solutions to increase its effectiveness.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
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?
Providers are in a unique position to influence the quality of SEDH data in the EHR because they both obtain and enter this data.
“Providers are in a unique position to impact this issue as they both obtain and enter this data”
From The relationship between perceptions of electronic health record usability and clinical importance of social and environmental determinants of health on provider documentation (2024) · cites this paper as [24]
The Discussions section says nurses interact frequently with patients and that accurate data entry by different clinical roles matters for care quality. The Conclusions section likewise emphasizes clinicians’ responsibility for accurate EHR notes. Neither passage addresses SEDH data specifically or says providers both obtain and enter that data. (LLM, conf=0.84)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe dual documentation burden increases clinician stress and reduces the time available for patient care.
“This dual documentation burden increases clinician stress and reduces the time available for patient care [6].”
From Implementation of large language models in electronic health records (2025) · cites this paper as [6]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
Electronic health records in ambulatory care—a national survey of physicians
DesRoches, C. M., Campbell, E. G., Rao, S. R., Donelan, K., Ferris, T. G., Jha, A., Kaushal, R., Levy, D. E., Rosenbaum, S., Shields, A. E., et al. (2008) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmsa0802005 · Cited by 1,111 · see citing works
Electronic health record adoption in US hospitals: the emergence of a digital “advanced use” divide
Adler-Milstein, J., Holmgren, A. J., Kralovec, P., Worzala, C., Searcy, T., & Patel, V. (2017) · Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association · doi:10.1093/jamia/ocx080 · Cited by 392 · see citing works
Atasoy, H., Greenwood, B. N., & McCullough, J. S. (2018) · Annual Review of Public Health · doi:10.1146/annurev-publhealth-040218-044206 · Cited by 254 · see citing works
Lee, S. M., Kim, Y. R., & Lee, J. (1995) · Journal of Management Information Systems · doi:10.1080/07421222.1995.11518086 · Cited by 136 · see citing works
Relationship Between Use of Electronic Health Record Features and Health Care Quality
Poon, E. G., Wright, A. T., Simon, S. R., Jenter, C. A., Kaushal, R., Volk, L. A., Cleary, P. D., Singer, J. A., Tumolo, A. Z., & Bates, D. W. (2010) · Medical Care · doi:10.1097/mlr.0b013e3181c16203 · Cited by 131 · see citing works
Impact of Electronic Health Records on Long-Term Care Facilities: Systematic Review
Kruse, C. S., Mileski, M., Vijaykumar, A. G., Viswanathan, S. V., Suskandla, U., & Chidambaram, Y. (2017) · JMIR Medical Informatics · doi:10.2196/medinform.7958 · Cited by 123 · see citing works
Melnick, E. R., West, C. P., Nath, B., Cipriano, P. F., Peterson, C., Satele, D. V., Shanafelt, T., & Dyrbye, L. N. (2021) · Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association · doi:10.1093/jamia/ocab059 · Cited by 105 · see citing works
Achieving Meaningful Use of Health Information Technology
Seidman, J. (2012) · Archives of Internal Medicine · doi:10.1001/archinternmed.2012.872 · Cited by 99 · see citing works
Does the meaningful use of electronic health records improve patient outcomes?
Wani, D., & Malhotra, M. K. (2018) · Journal of Operations Management · doi:10.1016/j.jom.2018.06.003 · Cited by 88 · see citing works
Yoon‐Flannery, K., Zandieh, S. O., Kuperman, G. J., Langsam, D. J., Hyman, D., & Kaushal, R. (2008) · Journal of Innovation in Health Informatics · doi:10.14236/jhi.v16i4.703 · Cited by 68 · see citing works
Exploring perceptions of how nature recreation benefits mental wellbeing: a qualitative enquiry
Brymer, E., Crabtree, J., & King, R. (2020) · Annals of Leisure Research · doi:10.1080/11745398.2020.1778494 · Cited by 63 · see citing works
Electronic Health Records and Quality of Care
Yanamadala, S., Morrison, D. E., Curtin, C. M., McDonald, K. M., & Hernandez‐Boussard, T. (2016) · Medicine · doi:10.1097/md.0000000000003332 · Cited by 62 · see citing works
Claydon, E. A., Davidov, D. M., Zullig, K. J., et al. (2018) · BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth · doi:10.1186/s12884-018-2105-6 · Cited by 52 · see citing works
Barnett, M. L., Mehrotra, A., & Jena, A. B. (2016) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.i3835 · Cited by 44 · see citing works
Assessing the relationship between patient safety culture and EHR strategy
Ford, E. W., Silvera, G. A., Kazley, A. S., et al. (2016) · International Journal of Health Care Quality Assurance · doi:10.1108/ijhcqa-10-2015-0125 · Cited by 18 · see citing works
van Poelgeest, R., Schrijvers, A. J. P., Boonstra, A., & Roes, K. C. B. (2021) · JMIR Human Factors · doi:10.2196/27671 · Cited by 10 · see citing works
Unruh, M. A., Jung, H., Vest, J. R., et al. (2017) · Medical Care · doi:10.1097/mlr.0000000000000695 · Cited by 8 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Health Care Professionals’ Experience of Using AI: Systematic Review With Narrative Synthesis
Ayorinde, A., Mensah, D. O., Walsh, J., Ghosh, I., Ibrahim, S. A., Hogg, J., Peek, N., & Griffiths, F. (2024) · Journal of Medical Internet Research · doi:10.2196/55766 · Cited by 55 · see citing works
Implementation of large language models in electronic health records
Griot, M., Vanderdonckt, J., & Yuksel, D. (2025) · PLOS Digital Health · doi:10.1371/journal.pdig.0001141 · Cited by 23 · see citing works
Sood, N., Stetter, C., Kunselman, A., & Jasani, S. (2024) · PLOS Digital Health · doi:10.1371/journal.pdig.0000428 · Cited by 6 · see citing works
- Authors
- Upadhyay, S., & Hu, H.-F.
- Affiliations
- University of Nevada, Las Vegas (US)
- Corresponding author
- Upadhyay, Soumya
- ORCID
- Upadhyay, Soumya
- Venue
- Health Services Insights
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2022-01
- Volume
- 15
- Pages
- 11786329211070722-11786329211070722
- ISSN
- 1178-6329 (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC8902175
- OpenAlex
- W4214860116
- Cited by
- 111
- References
- 17
- Citations by year
- 2026: 17 · 2025: 48 · 2024: 28 · 2023: 16 · 2022: 2
- FWCI
- 17.62
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Health Services Insights (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Digital Scholarship - UNLV (University of Nevada Reno) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- Digital Scholarship - UNLV (University of Nevada Reno) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc)
- DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
- Funders
- UNLV University Libraries
- 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, clinician perceptions, quality of care, patient safety, nurses, medical errors, data accuracy, interoperability, job role differences
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
