Information and Communication Technologies in Primary Healthcare – Barriers and Facilitators in the Implementation Process

• Authors: Bartosz Pędziński , Paweł Sowa , Waldemar Pędziński , Michalina Krzyżak , Dominik Maślach , Andrzej Szpak
• Languages of publication: EN

Abstracts

EN

Despite the great expansion and many benefits of information and communication technologies (ICT) in healthcare, the attitudes of Polish general practitioners (GPs) to e-health have not been explored. The aim of this study was to determine the GPs’ perception of ICT use in healthcare and to identify barriers to the adoption of EMR (Electronic Medical Records) in the Podlaskie Voivodeship. Online and telephone surveys were conducted between April and May 2013. Responses from 103 GP practices, 43% of all practices in the region, were analysed. The results showed that 67% of the respondents agreed that IT systems improve quality of healthcare services. In the GP group who declared at least partial EMR implementation, 71.4% see the positive impact of IT on practice staff processes and 66.1% on personal working processes. In this group, more than three-quarters of GPs did not see any positive impact of ICT on the average number of patients treated per day, number of patients within the practice or scope of services. The four most common barriers to EMR implementation were: lack of funds, risk of a malfunction in the system, resistance to change, and lack of training and proper information. Although the use of ICT by Polish GPs is limited, their attitude to e-health is generally positive or neutral and resembles the overall pattern in Europe. Barriers identified by GPs need to be taken into account to ensure the effective implementation of e-health across the country.

• Publisher: Sciendo
• Journal: Studies in Logic, Grammar and Rhetoric
• Year: 2013
• Volume: 35
• Issue: 1
• Pages: 179-189

Dates

published

2013-12-01

online

2013-12-31

Contributors

author

Bartosz Pędziński

• Department of Public Health, Medical University of Bialystok, Poland
• Lomza Medical Center Ltd., Poland

author

Paweł Sowa

• Department of Public Health, Medical University of Bialystok, Poland

author

Waldemar Pędziński

• Lomza Medical Center Ltd., Poland
• Department of Clinical Nursing, Higher School of Agrobusiness, Lomza, Poland

author

Michalina Krzyżak

• Department of Public Health, Medical University of Bialystok, Poland

author

Dominik Maślach

• Department of Public Health, Medical University of Bialystok, Poland

author

Andrzej Szpak

• Department of Public Health, Medical University of Bialystok, Poland

References

• European Commission. Information Society and Media Directorate General. (2007). Benchmarking ICT use among General Practitioners in Europe 2007, Country Profile: Poland.
• Chaudhry, B., Wang, J., & Wu, S. (2006). Systematic review: impact of health information technology on quality, efficiency, and costs of medical care. Annals of Internal Medicine, 144(10), 742-752.
• Cotea, C. (2010). Electronic Health Record Adoption: Perceived Barriers and Facilitators. Research Coordination Unit, CMVH.
• DesRoches, C. M., Painter, M. W., & Jha, A. K. (2013). Health Information Technology in the United States: Better Information Systems for Better Care. Robert Wood Johnson Foundation’s annual report.
• Dobrev, A., Haesner, M., & Husing, T. (2008). Benchmarking ICT use among General Practitioners in Europe final report. Bonn: European Commision, 53-60.
• Gans, D., Kralewski, J., Hammons, T., & Dowd, B. (2005). Medical groups’ adoption of electronic health records and information systems. Health Affairs, 24(5), 1323-1333.[Crossref]
• Georgiou, A., Ampt, A., Creswick, N., Westbrook, J. I., & Braithwaite, J. (2009). Computerized Provider Order Entry What are health professionals concerned about? A qualitative study in an Australian hospital. International Journal of Medical Informatics, 78(1), 60-70.[WoS][Crossref]
• Hackl, W., Hoerbst, A., & Ammenwerth, E. (2009). The electronic health record in Austria: physicians’ acceptance is influenced by negative emotions. Studies in Health Technology & Informatics, 150, 140-144.
• Hier, D. B., Rothschild, A., LeMaistre, A., & Keeler, J. (2005). Differing faculty and house staff acceptance of an electronic health record. International Journal of Medical Informatics, 74(7-8), 657-662.[Crossref][PubMed]
• Hillestad, R., Bigelow, J., & Bower, A. (2005). Can electronic medical record systems transform health care? Potential health benefits, savings, and costs. Health Affairs (Millwood), 24(5), 1103-1117.[Crossref]
• Jha, A. K., Bates, D. W., Jenter, C., Orav, E. J., Zheng, J., Cleary, P., & Simon, R. (2009). Electronic Health Records: Use, Barriers and Satisfaction Among PhysiciansWho Care For Black and Hispanic Patients. Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice, 15(1), 158-163. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2753.2008.00975.x.[Crossref][WoS]
• Jha, A. K., DesRoches, C. M., Campbell, E. G., Donelan, K., Sowmya, R. R., Ferris, T. G., Shields, A, Rosenbaum, S., & Blumenthal, D. (2009). Use of electronic health records in US hospitals. The New England Journal of Medicine, 360(16), 1628-1638.[WoS]
• Kahn, N. B. (2004). The Future of Family Medicine: A Collaborative Project of the Family Medicine Community. Annals of Family Medicine, 2 (suppl 1), s3-s32.
• Kossman, S. P., & Scheidenhelm, S. L. (2008). Nurses’ perceptions of the impact of electronic health records on work and patient outcomes. CIN: Computers, Informatics, Nursing, 26(2), 69-77.
• Leung, G. M., Yu, P. L., Wong, I. O., Johnston, J. M., & Tin, K. Y. (2003). Incentives and barriers that influence clinical computerization in Hong Kong: a population-based physician survey. Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association, 10, 201-212.
• Linder, J. A., Ma, J., Bates, D. W., Middleton, B., & Stafford, R. S. (2007). Electronic health record use and the quality of ambulatory care in the United States. Archivos de Medicina Interna, 167(13), 1400-1405.
• Lockhart, P. (2008). Two nations achieve a high level of primary care information technology (IT) interoperability: an introduction to a series comparing Denmark and New Zealand’s IT and health care. Informatics in Primary Care, 16(3), 179-181.
• Loomis, G. A., Ries, J. S., Saywell Jr., R. M., & Thakker, N. R. (2002). If electronic medical records are so great, why aren’t family physicians using them? Journal of Family Practice, 51(7), 636-641.
• Menachemi, N. & Collum, T. H. (2011). Benefits and drawbacks of electronic health record systems. Risk Management and Healthcare Policy, 4, 47-55.[PubMed]
• Miller, R. H., & Sim, I. (2004). Physicians’ Use Of Electronic Medical Records: Barriers And Solutions. Health Affairs, 23(2), 116-126.[Crossref]
• Morin, D., Tourigny, A., Pelletier, D., Robichaud, L., Mathieu, L., Vezina, A., Bonin, L., Buteau, M. (2005). Seniors’ views on the use of electronic health records. Informatics in Primary Care, 13, 125-133.
• Najwyzsza Izba Kontroli. (2013). Informatyzacja szpitali informacja o wynikach kontroli, Raport NIK 2013.
• Pedzinski, B., Sowa, P., Kolpak, M., Pedzinski, W., & Szpak, A. (2013). The use of electronic medical records in primary healthcare in the podlaskie voivodeship. Polish Journal of Public Health, 123(2), 107-111.
• Peterson, K. A. (2012). Essential requirements of information technology for primary care. Family Practice, 29(2), 119-120.[PubMed][WoS][Crossref]
• Pike, Ch. (2010). An Empirical Analysis of the effects of GP competition. Cooperation & Competition Panel Working Paper Series, vol. 1(2).
• Poissant, L., Pereira, J., Tamblyn, R., & Kawasumi, Y. (2005). The Impact of Electronic Health Records on Time Efficiency of Physicians and Nurses: A Systematic Review. Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association, 12(5), 505-516.[Crossref]
• Police, R. L., Foster, T. & Wong, K. S. (2010). Adoption and use of health information technology in physician practice organisations: systematic review. Informatics in Primary Care, 18(4), 245-258.
• Protti, D., & Johansen, I. (2010).Widespread Adoption of Information Technology in Primary Care Physician Offices in Denmark: A Case Study. The Commonwealth Fund: ‘Issues in international health policy’, 1379(80).
• Romano, M. J., & Stafford, R. S. (2011). Electronic health records and clinical decision support systems: impact on national ambulatory care quality. Archivos de Medicina Interna, 171(10), 897-903.
• Saleem, J. J., Patterson, E. S., Militello, L., Render, M. L., Orshansky, G., & Asch, S. M. (2005). Exploring barriers and facilitators to the use of computerized clinical reminders. Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association, 12(4), 438-447. [Crossref]
• Schoen, C., Osborn, R., Squires, D., Doty, M., Rasmussen, P., Pierson, R., & Applebaum, S. (2012). A Survey of Primary Care Doctors in Ten Countries Shows Progress in Use of Health Information Technology, Less in Other Areas. Health Affairs (Millwood), 31(12), 2805-2816.[Crossref]
• Sequist, T. D., Cullen, T., Hays, H., Taualii, M. M., Simon, S. R., & Bates, D. W. (2007). Implementation and use of an electronic health record within the Indian Health Service. Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association, 14(2), 191-197.[Crossref]
• Ustawa z dnia 28 kwietnia 2011 o systemie informacji w ochronie zdrowia. (2011). Dz.U. 2011 vol. 113 item 657.
• Wang, S. J., Middleton, B., & Prosser, L. A. (2003). A cost-benefit analysis of electronic medical records in primary care. The American Journal of Medicine, 114(5), 397-403.[Crossref]
• Zakaria, N., Mohd Affendi, S. Y., & Zakaria, N. (2010). Managing ICT in healthcare organization: culture, challenges, and issues of technology adoption and implementation. In Y. K. Dwivedi, K. Khoumbati, B. Lal, & A. Srivastava (Eds.), Handbook of Research on Advances in Health Informatics and Electronic Healthcare Applications: Global Adoption and Impact of Information Communication Technologies (pp. 153-168). Hershey, PA: IGI Global.

Identifiers

DOI

10.2478/slgr-2013-0035