Development an extended-information success system model (ISSM) based on nurses' point of view for hospital EHRs: a combined framework and questionnaire.
Electronic health record
Evaluation
Hospital information system
Information system success model
Journal
BMC medical informatics and decision making
ISSN: 1472-6947
Titre abrégé: BMC Med Inform Decis Mak
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101088682
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
22 03 2022
22 03 2022
Historique:
received:
01
07
2021
accepted:
04
03
2022
entrez:
23
3
2022
pubmed:
24
3
2022
medline:
3
5
2022
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Understanding the hospital EHR success rate has great benefits for hospitals. The present study aimed to 1-Propose an extended-ISSM framework and a questionnaire in a systematic manner for EHR evaluation based on nurses' perspectives, 2-Determine the EHR success rate, and 3-Explore the effective factors contributing to EHR success. The proposed framework was developed using ISSM, TAM3, TTF, HOT-FIT, and literature review in seven steps. A self-administrated structured 65-items questionnaire was developed with CVI: 90.27% and CVR: 94.34%. Construct validity was conducted using EFA and CFA. Eleven factors were identified, collectively accounting for 71.4% of the total variance. In the EFA step, 15 questions and two questions in EFA were excluded. Finally, 48 items remained in the framework including dimensions of technology, human, organization, ease of use, usefulness, and net benefits. The overall Cronbach's alpha value was 93.4%. In addition, the hospital EHR success rate was determined and categorized. In addition, effective factors on EHR success were explored. In total, 86 nurses participated in the study. On average, the "total hospital EHR success rate" was moderate. The total EHR success rates was ranging from 47.09 to 74.96%. The results of the Kruskal-Wallis test showed that there was a significant relationship between "gender" and "self-efficacy" (p-value: 0.042). A reverse relation between "years of experience using computers" and "training" (p-value: 0.012) was observed. "Years of experience using EHR" as well as "education level" (p-value: 0.001) and "ease of use" had a reverse relationship (p-value: 0.034). Our findings underscore the EHR success based on nurses' viewpoint in a developing country. Our results provide an instrument for comparison of EHR success rates in various hospitals.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Understanding the hospital EHR success rate has great benefits for hospitals. The present study aimed to 1-Propose an extended-ISSM framework and a questionnaire in a systematic manner for EHR evaluation based on nurses' perspectives, 2-Determine the EHR success rate, and 3-Explore the effective factors contributing to EHR success.
METHODS
The proposed framework was developed using ISSM, TAM3, TTF, HOT-FIT, and literature review in seven steps. A self-administrated structured 65-items questionnaire was developed with CVI: 90.27% and CVR: 94.34%. Construct validity was conducted using EFA and CFA. Eleven factors were identified, collectively accounting for 71.4% of the total variance. In the EFA step, 15 questions and two questions in EFA were excluded. Finally, 48 items remained in the framework including dimensions of technology, human, organization, ease of use, usefulness, and net benefits. The overall Cronbach's alpha value was 93.4%. In addition, the hospital EHR success rate was determined and categorized. In addition, effective factors on EHR success were explored.
RESULTS
In total, 86 nurses participated in the study. On average, the "total hospital EHR success rate" was moderate. The total EHR success rates was ranging from 47.09 to 74.96%. The results of the Kruskal-Wallis test showed that there was a significant relationship between "gender" and "self-efficacy" (p-value: 0.042). A reverse relation between "years of experience using computers" and "training" (p-value: 0.012) was observed. "Years of experience using EHR" as well as "education level" (p-value: 0.001) and "ease of use" had a reverse relationship (p-value: 0.034).
CONCLUSIONS
Our findings underscore the EHR success based on nurses' viewpoint in a developing country. Our results provide an instrument for comparison of EHR success rates in various hospitals.
Identifiants
pubmed: 35317784
doi: 10.1186/s12911-022-01800-1
pii: 10.1186/s12911-022-01800-1
pmc: PMC8939199
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
71Informations de copyright
© 2022. The Author(s).
Références
Int J Med Inform. 2019 Jul;127:102-108
pubmed: 31128821
Acta Inform Med. 2015 Apr;23(2):105-7
pubmed: 26005277
JMIR Med Inform. 2016 Jun 01;4(2):e19
pubmed: 27251559
Int J Med Inform. 2009 Feb;78(2):115-26
pubmed: 18675583
J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2012 Jul-Aug;19(4):610-4
pubmed: 22199017
J Nurs Res. 2011 Jun;19(2):150-60
pubmed: 21586992
Life (Basel). 2020 Dec 04;10(12):
pubmed: 33291615
Ann Intern Med. 2020 Jun 2;172(11 Suppl):S130-S136
pubmed: 32479182
Int J Med Inform. 2008 Jun;77(6):386-98
pubmed: 17964851
Comput Inform Nurs. 2012 May;30(5):257-64
pubmed: 22228251
BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2017 Feb 10;17(1):17
pubmed: 28187729
J Clin Nurs. 2018 Feb;27(3-4):e578-e589
pubmed: 28981172
BMC Nurs. 2021 Aug 17;20(1):146
pubmed: 34404406
Nurs Manage. 2014 Apr;45(4):18-20
pubmed: 24662543
JMIR Nurs. 2020 Jun 23;3(1):e13996
pubmed: 34345776
Inform Health Soc Care. 2019 Jan;44(1):1-11
pubmed: 28829654
JMIR Med Inform. 2020 Nov 18;8(11):e23623
pubmed: 33206050
Health Res Policy Syst. 2021 Dec 11;19(1):146
pubmed: 34895250
J Med Syst. 2016 Dec;40(12):252
pubmed: 27714560
BMC Public Health. 2020 Mar 2;20(1):189
pubmed: 32114986
Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2006 Jan 26;4:6
pubmed: 16438711
SAGE Open Nurs. 2019 Apr 18;5:2377960819843711
pubmed: 33415233
Inform Health Soc Care. 2018 Jan;43(1):84-107
pubmed: 28140717
Bull World Health Organ. 2000;78(6):803-10
pubmed: 10916917
J Adv Nurs. 2007 Oct;60(2):209-19
pubmed: 17877568
Child Adolesc Psychiatry Ment Health. 2014 Jul 07;8:19
pubmed: 25061477
Biomed Inform Insights. 2015 Apr 01;7:1-9
pubmed: 25983557
Open Access Maced J Med Sci. 2019 May 14;7(9):1407-1414
pubmed: 31198444
BMC Health Serv Res. 2014 Sep 04;14:370
pubmed: 25190184
Nurs Rep. 2021 Jan 01;11(1):12-27
pubmed: 34968308
BMC Health Serv Res. 2015 Jul 17;15:268
pubmed: 26184405
J Healthc Qual Res. 2021 Mar-Apr;36(2):103-112
pubmed: 33495115
Stud Health Technol Inform. 2006;122:337-41
pubmed: 17102276