The influence of electronic health record use on collaboration among medical specialties
BMC Health Services Research, ISSN: 1472-6963, Vol: 20, Issue: 1, Page: 676
2020
- 56Citations
- 342Captures
- 2Mentions
Metric Options: CountsSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Citations56
- Citation Indexes55
- 55
- CrossRef22
- Policy Citations1
- Policy Citation1
- Captures342
- Readers342
- 342
- Mentions2
- News Mentions2
- News2
Most Recent News
Integrated Electronic Health Record of Multidisciplinary Professionals Throughout the Cancer Care Pathway: A Pilot Study Exploring Patient-Centered Information in Breast Cancer Patients
Atsuko Sugiyama,1– 3 Hayato Okumiya,1 Katsuhiko Fujimoto,1 Kazuki Utsunomiya,1 Yuka Shimomura,2 Masaru Sanuki,4 Keitaro Kume,4 Takahiro Yano,4 Rina Kagawa,5 Hiroko Bando6 1R&D Planning Office, Canon
Article Description
Background: One of the main objectives of Electronic Health Records (EHRs) is to enhance collaboration among healthcare professionals. However, our knowledge of how EHRs actually affect collaborative practices is limited. This study examines how an EHR facilitates and constrains collaboration in five outpatient clinics. Methods: We conducted an embedded case study at five outpatient clinics of a Dutch hospital that had implemented an organization-wide EHR. Data were collected through interviews with representatives of medical specialties, administration, nursing, and management. Documents were analyzed to contextualize these data. We examined the following collaborative affordances of EHRs: (1) portability, (2) co-located access, (3) shared overviews, (4) mutual awareness, (5) messaging, and (6) orchestrating. Results: Our findings demonstrate how an EHR will both facilitate and constrain collaboration among specialties and disciplines. Affordances that were inscribed in the system for collaboration purposes were not fully actualized in the hospital because: (a) The EHR helps health professionals coordinate patient care on an informed basis at any time and in any place but only allows asynchronous patient record use. (b) The comprehensive patient file affords joint clinical decision-making based on shared data, but specialty- and discipline-specific user-interfaces constrain mutual understanding of that data. Moreover, not all relevant information can be easily shared across specialties and outside the hospital. (c) The reduced necessity for face-to-face communication saves time but is experienced as hindering collective responsibility for a smooth workflow. (d) The EHR affords registration at the source and registration of activities through orders, but the heightened administrative burden for physicians and the strict authorization rules on inputting data constrain the flexible, multidisciplinary collaboration. (e) While the EHR affords a complete overview, information overload occurs due to the parallel generation of individually owned notes and the high frequency of asynchronous communication through messages of varying clinical priority. Conclusions: For the optimal actualization of EHRs' collaborative affordances in hospitals, coordinated use of these affordances by health professionals is a prerequisite. Such coordinated use requires organizational, technical, and behavioral adaptations. Suggestions for hospital-wide policies to enhance trust in both the EHR and in its coordinated use for effective collaboration are offered.
Bibliographic Details
http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=85088450770&origin=inward; http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12913-020-05542-6; http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32698807; https://bmchealthservres.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12913-020-05542-6; https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12913-020-05542-6
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know