Onderzoek in de Verenigde Staten naar opvattingen en ervaringen van patiënten met het online inzien van hun eigen dossier (personal health record, PHR), inclusief aantekeningen van de behandelaren.
LINK
Background: Nursing documentation could improve the quality of nursing care by being an important source of information about patients' needs and nursing interventions. Standardized terminologies (e.g. NANDA International and the Omaha System) are expected to enhance the accuracy of nursing documentation. However, it remains unclear whether nursing staff actually feel supported in providing nursing care by the use of electronic health records that include standardized terminologies.Objectives: a. To explore which standardized terminologies are being used by nursing staff in electronic health records. b. To explore to what extent they feel supported by the use of electronic health records. c. To examine whether the extent to which nursing staff feel supported is associated with the standardized terminologies that they use in electronic health records.Design: Cross-sectional survey design.Setting and participants: A representative sample of 667 Dutch registered nurses and certified nursing assistants working with electronic health records. The respondents were working in hospitals, mental health care, home care or nursing homes.Methods: A web-based questionnaire was used. Descriptive statistics were performed to explore which standardized terminologies were used by nursing staff, and to explore the extent to which nursing staff felt supported by the use of electronic health records. Multiple linear regression analyses examined the association between the extent of the perceived support provided by electronic health records and the use of specific standardized terminologies.Results: Only half of the respondents used standardized terminologies in their electronic health records. In general, nursing staff felt most supported by the use of electronic health records in their nursing activities during the provision of care. Nursing staff were often not positive about whether the nursing information in the electronic health records was complete, relevant and accurate, and whether the electronic health records were user-friendly. No association was found between the extent to which nursing staff felt supported by the electronic health records and the use of specific standardized terminologies.Conclusions: More user-friendly designs for electronic health records should be developed. The poor user-friendliness of electronic health records and the variety of ways in which software developers have integrated standardized terminologies might explain why these terminologies had less of an impact on the extent to which nursing staff felt supported by the use of electronic health records.
LINK
Abstract Background: With the growing shortage of nurses, labor-saving technology has become more important. In health care practice, however, the fit with innovations is not easy. The aim of this study is to analyze the development of a mobile input device for electronic medical records (MEMR), a potentially labor-saving application supported by nurses, that failed to meet the needs of nurses after development. Method: In a case study, we used an axiomatic design framework as an evaluation tool to visualize the mismatches between customer needs and the design parameters of the MEMR, and trace these mismatches back to (preliminary) decisions in the development process. We applied a mixed-method research design that consisted of analyzing of 118 external and internal files and working documents, 29 interviews and shorter inquiries, a user test, and an observation of use. By factoring and grouping the findings, we analyzed the relevant categories of mismatches. Results: The involvement of nurses during the development was extensive, but not all feedback was, or could not be, used effectively to improve the MEMR. The mismatches with the most impact were found to be: (1) suboptimal supportive technology, (2) limited functionality of the app and input device, and (3) disruption of nurses’ workflow. Most mismatches were known by the IT department when the MEMR was offered to the units as a product. Development of the MEMR came to a halt because of limited use. Conclusion: Choices for design parameters, made during the development of labor-saving technology for nurses, may conflict with the customer needs of nurses. Even though the causes of mismatches were mentioned by the IT department, the nurse managers acquired the MEMR based on the idea behind the app. The effects of the chosen design parameters should not only be compared to the customer needs, but also be assessed with nurses and nurse managers for the expected effect on the workflow.
LINK
