Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

End-user support for primary care electronic medical records: a qualitative case study of users’ needs, expectations, and realities

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Health Systems

Abstract

Support is considered an important factor for realizing the benefits of health information technology, but there is a dearth of research on the topic of support, especially in primary care. We conducted a qualitative multiple case study of four family health teams and one family health organization in Ontario, Canada in an attempt to gain insight into users’ expectations and needs, and the realities of end-user support for primary care electronic medical records. Data were collected by semi-structured interviews, document review, and observation of training sessions. The analysis highlights the important role of on-site information technology staff and super-users in liaising with various stakeholders to solve technical problems and providing hardware and functional (how to) support; the local development of data support practices to ensure consistent documentation; and the gaps that exist in users’ and support personnel’s understanding of each other’s work processes.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Arts DG, DE Keizer NF and Scheffr GJ (2002) Defining and improving data quality in medical registries: a literature review, case study, and generic framework. Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association 9 (6), 600–611.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ash J (1997) Organizational factors that influence information technology diffusion in academic health sciences centers. Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association 4 (2), 102–111.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ash JS, Stavri PZ, Dykstra R and Fournier L (2003) Implementing computerized physician order entry: the importance of special people. International Journal of Medical Informatics 69 (2–3), 235–250.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baum A et al (2004) Assessing the impact of change in the organization of a technical support system for a health information systems (HIS). Studies in Health Technology and Informatics 107 (Pt 2), 1367–1370.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berglund E and Priestley M (2001) Open-source documentation: in search of user-driven, just-in-time writing. In Proceedings of the 19th Annual International Conference on Computer Documentation, pp 132–141, ACM, Sante Fe, New Mexico.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blumenthal D and Tavenner M (2010) The ‘meaningful use’ regulation for electronic health records. New England Journal of Medicine 363 (6), 501–504.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bygholm A (2001) End-user support: a necessary issue in the implementation and use of EPR systems. Studies in Health Technology and Informatics 84 (Pt 1), 604–608.

    Google Scholar 

  • Canada Health Infoway. (2013) The emerging benefits of electronic medical record use in community-based care. [WWW document] https://www.infoway-inforoute.com/index.php/component/docman/doc_download/1395-the-emerging-benefits-of-electronic-medical-record-use-in-community-based-care-full-report (accessed 10 May 2013).

  • Chaudhry B et al (2006) Systematic review: impact of health information technology on quality, efficiency, and costs of medical care. Annals of Internal Medicine 144 (10), 742–752.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Corbin JM and Strauss AL (2008) Basics of Qualitative Research: Techniques and Procedures for Developing Grounded Theory, 3rd edn, Sage Publications, Los Angeles, CA.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Cresswell K and Sheikh A (2012) Organizational issues in the implementation and adoption of health information technology innovations: an interpretative review. International Journal of Medical Informatics advance online publication 9 November, doi: 10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2012.10.007.

  • DeLone WH and McLean ER (1992) Information systems success: the quest for the dependent variable. Information Systems Research 3 (1), 60–95.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • DeLone WH and McLean ER (2003) The DeLone and McLean model of information systems success: a ten-year update. Journal of Management Information Systems 19 (4), 9–30.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fernando J (2010) Clinicians, security and information technology support services in practice settings – a pilot study. Studies in Health Technology and Informatics 160 (Pt 1), 228–232.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gagnon MP et al (2010) Implementation of an electronic medical record in family practice: a case study. Informatics in Primary Care 18 (1), 31–40.

    Google Scholar 

  • Govindarajulu C and Reithel BJ (1998) Beyond the information center: an instrument to measure end-user computing support from multiple sources. Information & Management 33 (5), 241–250.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greiver M, Barnsley J, Glazier RH, Moineddin R and Harvey BJ (2011) Implementation of electronic medical records: effect on the provision of preventive services in a pay-for-performance environment. Canadian Family Physician 57 (10), e381–e389.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hersh WR (1995) The electronic medical record: promises and problems. Journal of the American Society for Information Science 46 (10), 772–776.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jiang JJ, Klein G and Carr CL (2002) Measuring information system service quality: Servqual from the other side. MIS Quarterly 26 (2), 145–166.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson SB et al (2008) An electronic health record based on structured narrative. Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association 15 (1), 54–64.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kantor GS, Wilson WD and Midgley A (2003) Open-source software and the primary care EMR. Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association 10 (6), 616.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kettinger WJ and Lee CC (2005) Zones of tolerance: alternative scales for measuring information systems service quality. MIS Quarterly 29 (4), 607–623.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lacey A and Luff D (2007) Qualitative Research Analysis. The NIHR RDS for the East, Midlands/Yorkshire, the Humber.

    Google Scholar 

  • Landrum H, Prybutok VR and Zhang XN (2007) A comparison of Magal’s service quality instrument with SERVPERF. Information & Management 44 (1), 104–113.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lanier CR (2011) Open source software peer-to-peer forums and culture: a preliminary investigation of global participation in user assistance. Journal of Technical Writing and Communication 41 (4), 347–366.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lau F, Hagens S and Muttitt S (2007) A proposed benefits evaluation framework for health information systems in Canada. Electronic Healthcare 5 (3), 112–118.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lau F, Partridge C, Randhawa G and Bowen M (2013) Applying the clinical adoption framework to evaluate the impact of an ambulatory electronic medical record. Studies in Health Technology and Informatics 183: 15–20.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lau F, Price M and Keshavjee K (2011) From benefits evaluation to clinical adoption: making sense of health information system success in Canada. Healthcare Quarterly 14 (1), 39–45.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leitheiser RL and Wetherbe JC (1986) Service support levels: an organized approach to end-user computing. MIS Quarterly 10 (4), 337–349.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lluch M (2011) Healthcare professionals’ organisational barriers to health information technologies-a literature review. International Journal of Medical Informatics 80 (12), 849–862.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mcdonald CJ et al (2003) Open Source software in medical informatics – why, how and what. International Journal of Medical Informatics 69 (2–3), 175–184.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morgan L and Finnegan P (2007) Benefits and drawbacks of open source software: an exploratory study of secondary software firms. In Open Source Development, Adoption and Innovation (Feller J, Fitzgerald B, Scacchi W and Sillitti A, Eds), pp 307–312, Springer, Boston, MA.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Munkvold R (2003) End-user support usage. In Computing Information Technology: The Human Side (Gordon S, Ed), pp 146–160, Idea Group Publishing, Hershey, PA.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Novak LL, Anders S, Gadd CS and Lorenzi NM (2012) Mediation of adoption and use: a key strategy for mitigating unintended consequences of health IT implementation. Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association 19 (6), 1043–1049.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ontario Ministry of Health and Long Term Care. (2009) Guide to physician compensation. [WWW document] http://www.health.gov.on.ca/en/pro/programs/fht/docs/fht_compensation.pdf (accessed 4 March 2013).

  • Parasuraman A, Zeithaml VA and Berry LL (1985) A monceptual model of service quality and its implications for future research. Journal of Marketing 49 (4), 41–50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Patel VL, Arocha JF and Kushniruk AW (2002) Patients’ and physicians’ understanding of health and biomedical concepts: relationship to the design of EMR systems. Journal of Biomedical Informatics 35 (1), 8–16.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Petersen LS (2010) Complexities in securing sustainable IT infrastructures in hospitals: the many faces of local technical support. Studies in Health Technology and Informatics 160 (Pt 2), 899–903.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pitt LF, Watson RT and Kavan CB (1997) Measuring information systems service quality: concerns for a complete canvas. MIS Quarterly 21 (2), 209–221.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ritchie J and Spencer L (1994) Qualitative data analysis for applied policy research. In Analysing Qualitative Data (Bryman A and Burgess RG, Eds), pp 173–194, Routledge, London.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Rosenbloom ST, Denny JC, Xu H, Lorenzi N, Stead WW and Johnson KB (2011) Data from clinical notes: a perspective on the tension between structure and flexible documentation. Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association 18 (2), 181–186.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rosser WW, Colwill JM, Kasperski J and Wilson L (2011) Progress of Ontario’s family health team model: a patient-centered medical home. Annals of Family Medicine 9 (2), 165–171.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schoen C, Osborn R, Doty MM, Sqires D, Peugh J and Applebaum S (2009) A survey of primary care physicians in eleven countries, 2009: perspectives on care, costs, and experiences. Health Affairs (Millwood) 28 (6), w1171–w1183.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schoen C et al (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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shachak A, Barnsley J, Tu K, Jadad AR and Lemieux-Charles L (2011) Understanding end-user support for health information technology: a theoretical framework. Informatics in Primary Care 19 (3), 169–172.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shachak A et al (in press) User manuals for a primary care electronic medical record system: a mixed methods study of user- and vendor-generated documents. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication doi: 10.1109/tpc.2013.2263649.

  • Shachak A, Barnsley J, Montgomery C, Tu K, Jadad AR and Lemieux-Charles L (2012) End-user support for a primary care electronic medical record: a qualitative case study of a vendor’s perspective. Informatics in Primary Care 20 (3), 185–195.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Speier C and Brown CV (1997) Differences in end-user computing support and control across user departments. Information & Management 32 (2), 85–99.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Terry A et al (2008) Implementing electronic health records: key factors in primary care. Canadian Family Physician 54 (5), 730–736.

    Google Scholar 

  • The National Alliance for Health Information Technology (NAHIT). (2008) Report to the office of the national coordinator for health information technology on defining key health information technology terms.

  • van der Meijden MJ, Tange HJ, Troost J and Hasman A (2003) Determinants of success of inpatient clinical information systems: a literature review. Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association 10 (3), 235–243.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vedel I et al (2012) Healthcare professionals’ adoption and use of a clinical information system (CIS) in primary care: insights from the Da Vinci study. International Journal of Medical Informatics 81 (2), 73–87.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vest JR and Stephens JH (2012) The use and role of open source software applications in public and not-for-profit hospitals in the United States. Health Care Management Review doi: 10.1097/HMR.0b013e318276f9ed.

  • Walkinshaw E (2011) Challenges of family practice: shopping for electronics. Canadian Medical Association Journal 183 (12), 1353–1354.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wynn D, Pratt R and Bradley R (2012) Impact of software ecosystems on the implementation of open source-based electronic health record software. In Proceedings of the Eighteenth Americas Conference on Information Systems. Association for Information Systems (AIS), Seattle, Washington DC.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yin RK (2009) Case Study Research: Design and Methods, 4th edn, Sage Publications, Los Angeles, CA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yusof MM, Kuljis J, Papazaferopoulou A and Stergioulas LK (2008) An evaluation framework for health information systems: human, organization and technology-fit factors (HOT-fit). International Journal of Medical Informatics 77 (6), 386–398.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank the training session participants and interviewees who took part in the study. The help of Mr. Tony Iantorno and OntarioMD is greatly appreciated. This work was supported by a research grant from the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR), funding reference number 93649. Dr. Karen Tu is supported by a CIHR Fellowship Award in Primary Care.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institute of Health Policy, Management and Evaluation, University of Toronto, Canada

    Aviv Shachak, Catherine Montgomery, Jan Barnsley, Alejandro R Jadad & Louise Lemieux-Charles

  2. Faculty of Information, University of Toronto, Canada

    Aviv Shachak & Rustam Dow

  3. Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences, Canada

    Karen Tu

  4. Department of Family and Community Medicine, University of Toronto, Canada

    Karen Tu

  5. Toronto Western Hospital Family Health Team, Canada

    Karen Tu

  6. Centre for Global eHealth Innovation, University Health Network, Canada

    Alejandro R Jadad

  7. Centre for Health, Wellness and Cancer Survivorship, University Health Network, Canada

    Alejandro R Jadad

  8. Department of Anesthesia, University of Toronto, Canada

    Alejandro R Jadad

  9. Dalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto, Canada

    Alejandro R Jadad

Authors
  1. Aviv Shachak
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Catherine Montgomery
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Rustam Dow
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Jan Barnsley
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Karen Tu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Alejandro R Jadad
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Louise Lemieux-Charles
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Aviv Shachak.

Additional information

Conflict of Interest

To the best of our knowledge, no conflict of interest, financial or otherwise, exists.

Appendix

Appendix

Table A1

Table A1 Code definitions and guidelinesa
Full size table

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Shachak, A., Montgomery, C., Dow, R. et al. End-user support for primary care electronic medical records: a qualitative case study of users’ needs, expectations, and realities. Health Syst 2, 198–212 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1057/hs.2013.6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/hs.2013.6

Keywords

Search

Navigation