Users' perspectives of barriers and facilitators to implementing EHR in Canada: A study protocol

BackgroundIn Canada, federal, provincial, and territorial governments are developing an ambitious project to implement an interoperable electronic health record (EHR). Benefits for patients, healthcare professionals, organizations, and the public in general are expected. However, adoption of an interoperable EHR remains an important issue because many previous EHR projects have failed due to the lack of integration into practices and organizations. Furthermore, perceptions of the EHR vary between end-user groups, adding to the complexity of implementing this technology. Our aim is to produce a comprehensive synthesis of actual knowledge on the barriers and facilitators influencing the adoption of an interoperable EHR among its various users and beneficiaries.MethodsFirst, we will conduct a comprehensive review of the scientific literature and other published documentation on the barriers and facilitators to the implementation of the EHR. Standardized literature search and data extraction methods will be used. Studies' quality and relevance to inform decisions on EHR implementation will be assessed. For each group of EHR users identified, barriers and facilitators will be categorized and compiled using narrative synthesis and meta-analytical techniques. The principal factors identified for each group of EHR users will then be validated for its applicability to various Canadian contexts through a two-round Delphi study, involving representatives from each end-user groups. Continuous exchanges with decision makers and periodic knowledge transfer activities are planned to facilitate the dissemination and utilization of research results in policies regarding the implementation of EHR in the Canadian healthcare system.DiscussionGiven the imminence of an interoperable EHR in Canada, knowledge and evidence are urgently needed to prepare this major shift in our healthcare system and to oversee the factors that could affect its adoption and integration by all its potential users. This synthesis will be the first to systematically summarize the barriers and facilitators to EHR adoption perceived by different groups and to consider the local contexts in order to ensure the applicability of this knowledge to the particular realities of various Canadian jurisdictions. This comprehensive and rigorous strategy could be replicated in other settings.

[1]  Use and Adoption of Computer-b a s e d Patient Records , 2003 .

[2]  M. Cabana,et al.  Why don't physicians follow clinical practice guidelines? A framework for improvement. , 1999, JAMA.

[3]  Nancy M. Lorenzi,et al.  Review: Antecedents of the People and Organizational Aspects of Medical Informatics: Review of the Literature , 1997, J. Am. Medical Informatics Assoc..

[4]  C. Delpierre,et al.  A systematic review of computer-based patient record systems and quality of care: more randomized clinical trials or a broader approach? , 2004, International journal for quality in health care : journal of the International Society for Quality in Health Care.

[5]  Glyn Elwyn,et al.  Bmc Medical Informatics and Decision Making Instruments to Assess the Perception of Physicians in the Decision-making Process of Specific Clinical Encounters: a Systematic Review , 2007 .

[6]  Alec Holt,et al.  Consumers are ready to accept the transition to online and electronic records if they can be assured of the security measures. , 2007, MedGenMed : Medscape general medicine.

[7]  Camille Gagné,et al.  LES THÉORIES SOCIALES COGNITIVES: GUIDE POUR LA MESURE DES VARIABLES ET LE DÉVELOPPEMENT DE QUESTIONNAIRE , 1999 .

[8]  David B Allison,et al.  Divergence in popular diets relative to diets consumed by Americans, and implications for diet selection. , 2007, MedGenMed : Medscape general medicine.

[9]  C. Pyper,et al.  Patients' experiences when accessing their on-line electronic patient records in primary care. , 2004, The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners.

[10]  France Légaré,et al.  Interventions for improving the adoption of shared decision making by healthcare professionals. , 2010, The Cochrane database of systematic reviews.

[11]  P. Whelton,et al.  Predictors and mediators of successful long-term withdrawal from antihypertensive medications. TONE Cooperative Research Group. Trial of Nonpharmacologic Interventions in the Elderly. , 1999, Archives of family medicine.

[12]  H. Handoll,et al.  Interventions for replacing missing teeth: different times for loading dental implants. , 2004, The Cochrane database of systematic reviews.

[13]  E. Balas,et al.  Improving clinical practice using clinical decision support systems: a systematic review of trials to identify features critical to success , 2005, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[14]  P. Pluye,et al.  A scoring system for appraising mixed methods research, and concomitantly appraising qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods primary studies in Mixed Studies Reviews. , 2009, International journal of nursing studies.

[15]  J. Popay,et al.  Systematically reviewing qualitative and quantitative evidence to inform management and policy-making in the health field , 2005, Journal of health services research & policy.

[16]  Wendy Armstrong,et al.  Building on Values: The Future of Health Care in Canada , 2005 .

[17]  B. Paterson,et al.  Meta-study of qualitative health research : a practical guide to meta-analysis and meta-synthesis , 2001 .

[18]  France Légaré,et al.  Barriers and facilitators to implementing shared decision-making in clinical practice: update of a systematic review of health professionals' perceptions. , 2008, Patient education and counseling.

[19]  F. Légaré,et al.  Shared decision-making in Canada: update, challenges and where next! , 2007, Zeitschrift fur arztliche Fortbildung und Qualitatssicherung.

[20]  ETA S. BERNER,et al.  Review Paper: Will the Wave Finally Break? A Brief View of the Adoption of Electronic Medical Records in the United States , 2004, J. Am. Medical Informatics Assoc..

[21]  Tricia L Erstad,et al.  Analyzing computer based patient records: a review of literature. , 2003, Journal of healthcare information management : JHIM.

[22]  E. Vance Wilson,et al.  Modeling patients' acceptance of provider-delivered e-health. , 2004, Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA.

[23]  S. Brophy,et al.  Interventions for latent autoimmune diabetes (LADA) in adults. , 2011, The Cochrane database of systematic reviews.

[24]  Hans-Ulrich Prokosch,et al.  Empowerment of patients and communication with health care professionals through an electronic health record , 2003, Int. J. Medical Informatics.

[25]  JoEllen Wilbur,et al.  Determining criteria for excellence in nurse practitioner education: use of the Delphi Technique. , 2006, Nursing outlook.

[26]  N. Denzin,et al.  Handbook of Qualitative Research , 1994 .

[27]  David W. Bates,et al.  Improving electronic health record (EHR) accuracy and increasing compliance with health maintenance clinical guidelines through patient access and input , 2006, Int. J. Medical Informatics.

[28]  Suzanne D. Pawlowski,et al.  The Delphi method as a research tool: an example, design considerations and applications , 2004, Inf. Manag..

[29]  Norman Crolee Dalkey,et al.  An experimental study of group opinion , 1969 .

[30]  B. C. van Steenkiste,et al.  A Delphi technique as a method for selecting the content of an electronic patient record for asthma , 2002, Int. J. Medical Informatics.

[31]  J. Popay,et al.  Rationale and Standards for the Systematic Review of Qualitative Literature in Health Services Research , 1998, Qualitative health research.

[32]  Ken Flegel.  Getting to the electronic medical record , 2008, Canadian Medical Association Journal.

[33]  B. Burnand,et al.  The RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method User's Manual , 2001 .

[34]  Tim Benson,et al.  Clinical Document Architecture , 2010 .

[35]  James G. Anderson,et al.  Social, ethical and legal barriers to E-health , 2007, Int. J. Medical Informatics.

[36]  S. Rivard,et al.  Getting physicians to accept new information technology: insights from case studies , 2006, Canadian Medical Association Journal.

[37]  Amnon Shabo.  Clinical Document Architecture , 2009, Encyclopedia of Database Systems.

[38]  Roy Romanow,et al.  Building on Values: Report of the Commission on the Future of Health Care in Canada [Reports] , 2002 .

[39]  Robert C. Lee,et al.  Systematic Review of the Social, Ethical, and Legal Dimensions of Genetic Cancer Risk Assessment Technologies , 2004 .

[40]  R. Alvarez,et al.  The electronic health record: a leap forward in patient safety. , 2004, HealthcarePapers.

[41]  Karen Golden-Biddle,et al.  Towards systematic reviews that inform health care management and policy-making , 2005, Journal of health services research & policy.

[42]  Sally Thorne,et al.  Meta-Study of Qualitative Health Research , 2001 .

[43]  E. Rogers,et al.  Diffusion of Innovations , 1964 .

[44]  A. Booth,et al.  Cochrane Qualitative Research Methods Group , 2011 .

[45]  F. Légaré,et al.  Barriers and facilitators to implementing shared decision-making in clinical practice: a systematic review of health professionals' perceptions , 2006, Implementation science : IS.

[46]  David Young,et al.  Research Paper: Patient Experiences and Attitudes about Access to a Patient Electronic Health Care Record and Linked Web Messaging , 2004, J. Am. Medical Informatics Assoc..

[47]  Christian Nøhr,et al.  Patient opinion - EHR assessment from the users perspective , 2004, MedInfo.

[48]  J. Car,et al.  Interventions for promoting information and communication technologies adoption in healthcare professionals. , 2009, The Cochrane database of systematic reviews.

[49]  Don C Des Jarlais,et al.  Improving the reporting quality of nonrandomized evaluations of behavioral and public health interventions: the TREND statement. , 2004, American journal of public health.

[50]  Aileen Clarke,et al.  Developing a quality criteria framework for patient decision aids: online international Delphi consensus process , 2006, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[51]  M. Morgan.  In pursuit of a safe Canadian healthcare system. , 2004, HealthcarePapers.

[52]  J. Morse.  Designing funded qualitative research. , 1994 .

[53]  Sally Thorne,et al.  Meta-Study of Qualitative Health Research: A Practical Guide to Meta-Analysis and Meta-Synthesis , 2001 .

[54]  P. Shekelle,et al.  Systematic Review: Impact of Health Information Technology on Quality, Efficiency, and Costs of Medical Care , 2006, Annals of Internal Medicine.