Electronic documentation systems have the potential to assist registered nurses with timely access to patient health- and care-related information. Registered nurses are the largest users of electronic documentation systems; however, limited evidence exists about their comfort with electronic documentation system usage and the types of workarounds developed within the context of home care.
Aim
To explore home care registered nurses’ comfort with electronic documentation system usage and identify the types and reasons for the development and implementation of workarounds.
Methods
A cross-sectional survey design was employed to collect quantitative and qualitative data. A total of 217 home care registered nurses participated in the survey. Quantitative data were analyzed using descriptive statistics. Qualitative data were analyzed using inductive content analysis.
Findings: Individual (e.g., registered nurses’ technology-related experience), technological (e.g., electronic documentation system design) and organizational (e.g. training) characteristics influenced registered nurses’ comfort with electronic documentation system usage. Furthermore, workarounds stemmed from the technological characteristics of the electronic documentation system.
Conclusion
Findings highlight the need for assessing registered nurses’ level of comfort with electronic documentation system usage to inform training initiatives. Including registered nurses in the system design is advocated to ensure electronic documentation systems fit with the complexity of nursing practice, potentially enhancing registered nurses’ level of comfort and mitigating the development and employment of workarounds during system usage.
Black Book Market Research LLC. (2014). Hospital nurses forced to develop creative workarounds to deal with EHR system flaws: Outdated technologies and lack of interoperability. Reveals Black Book.
3.
Blijleven, V., Koelemeijer, K., Wetzels, M., & Jaspers, M. (2017). Workarounds emerging from electronic health record system usage: Consequences for patient safety, effectiveness of care, and efficiency of care. JMIR Human Factors, 4(4), e27. doi:10.2196/humanfactors.7978
4.
BowenG. A. (2009).
Supporting a grounded theory with an audit trail: An illustration. International Journal of Social Research Methodology,
12(4), 305–316. doi:10.1080/13645570802156196
5.
BowlesK.DykesP.DemirisG. (2015).
The use of health information technology to improve care and outcomes for older adults. Research in Gerontological Nursing,
8(1), 5–10. doi:10.3928/19404921-20121222-01
6.
BredfeldtC. E.AwadE. B.JosephK.SynderM. H. (2013).
Training providers: Beyond the basics of electronic health records. BMC Health Services Research,
13, 503. doi:10.1186/1472-6963-13-503
7.
Canadian Home Care Association. (2015). Technology enabled home care: Supporting independence and improving health outcomes in the home setting. Retrieved from http://www.cdnhomecare.ca/media.php?mid=4442
ChoI.KimE.ChoiW. H.StaggersN. (2016).
Comparing usability testing outcomes and functions of six electronic nursing record systems. International Journal of Medical Informatics,
88, 78–85. doi:10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2016.01.007
12.
CifuentesM.DavisM.FernaldD.GunnR.DickinsonP.CohenD. J. (2015).
Electronic health record challenges, workarounds, and solutions observed in practices integrating behavioural health and primary care. Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine,
28, S63–S72. doi:10.3122/jabfm.2015.S1.150133
13.
CresswellK.WorthA.SheikhA. (2012).
Integration of a nationally procured electronic health record system into user work practices. BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making,
12, 15. doi:10.1186/1472-6947-12-15
EloS.KaariainenM.KansteO.PolkkiT.UtriainenK.KyngasH. (2014).
Qualitative content analysis: A focus on trustworthiness. SAGE Open,
4(1), 1–10. doi:10.1177/2158244014522633
21.
Fan, W., Yan, Z. (2010). Factors affecting response rates of the web survey: A systematic review. Computers in Human Behavior, 26, 132--139. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2009.10.015
22.
FlanaganM. E.SaleemJ. J.MillitelloL. G.RussA. L.DoebbelingB. N. (2013).
Paper and computer-based workarounds to electronic health record use at three benchmark institutions. Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association,
20, e59–e66. doi:10.1136/amiajnl-2012-000982
23.
GubaE. G. (1981).
Criteria for assessing the trustworthiness of naturalistic inquiries. Educational Communication and Technology Journal,
29(2), 75–91. doi:10.1007/bf02766777
24.
HagedornT. J.KrishnamurtyS.GrosseI. R. (2016).
An information model to support user-centered design of medical devices. Journal of Biomedical Informatics,
62, 181–194. doi:10.1016/j.jbi.2016.07.010
HsiaoJ. L.ChenR. F. (2016).
Critical factors influencing physicians’ intention to use computerized clinical practice guidelines: An integrative model of activity theory and the technology acceptance model. BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making,
16(3). doi:10.1186/s12911-016-0241-3
29.
IBM Corp. (2015). IBM SPSS statistics for Windows, Version 23.0.
Armonk, NY:
Author.
30.
Kaya, N. (2011). Factors affecting nurses' attitudes toward computers in healthcare. CIN: Computers, Informatics, Nursing, 29(2), 121--129. doi:10.1097/NCN.0b013e3181f9dd0f
31.
KitchenP.WilliamsA.PongR. W.WilsonD. (2011).
Socio-spatial patterns of home care use in Ontario, Canada: A case study. Health and Place,
17, 195–206. Retrieved from http://socserv.mcmaster.ca/rdc/RDCwp40.pdf
McBrideS.DelaneyJ.TietzeM. (2012).
Health information technology and nursing. American Journal of Nursing,
112(8), 36–42. doi:10.1097/01.NAJ.0000418095.31317.1b
36.
McGinnC. A.GrenierS.DuplantieJ.ShawN.SicotteC.MathieuL., . . . GagnonM. P. (2011).
Comparison of user groups’ perspectives of barriers and facilitators to implementing electronic health records: A systematic review. BMC Medicine,
9, 46. doi:10.1186/1741-7015-9-46
37.
MenonS.MurphyD. R.SinghH.MeyerA. N. D.SittingD. F. (2016).
Workarounds and test results follow-up in electronic health record-based primary care. Applied Clinical Informatics,
7, 543–559. doi:10.4338/ACI-2015-10-RA-0135
MoenA. (2003).
A nursing perspective to design and implementation of electronic patient record systems. Journal of Biomedical Informatics,
36(4-5), 375–378.
PalesyD.JakimpwiczS.SaundersC.LewisJ. (2018).
Home care in Australia: An integrative review. Home Health Care Services Quarterly,
37(2), 113–139. doi:10.1080/01621424.2018.1438952
43.
PattersonE. S. (2018).
Workarounds to intended use of health information technology: A narrative review of the human factors engineering literature.Human Factors,
60(3), 281–292. doi:10.1177/0018720818762546
44.
PolitD. F.BeckC. T. (2012). Nursing Research: Generating and assessing evidence for Nursing Practice.
Philadelphia, PA:
Lippincott Williams & Wilkins.
RaddahaA. H. A. (2018).
Nurses’ perceptions about and confidence in using an electronic medical record system. Proceedings of Singapore Healthcare,
27(2), 110–117. doi:10.1177/2010105817732585
47.
RathertC.PorterT.MittlerJ. N.Fleig-PalmerM. (2017).
Seven years after meaningful use: Physicians’ and nurses’ experiences with electronic health records. Health Care Management Review,
44, 30–40. doi:10.1097/HMR.0000000000000168
RiveraJ.McPhersonA. C.HamiltonJ.BirkenC.CoonsM.PetersM., . . . StinsonJ. (2018).
User-centered design of a mobile app for weight and health management in adolescents with complex health needs: Qualitative study. JMIR Formative Research,
2(1), 1–15. Retrieved from https://formative.jmir.org/2018/1/e7/
52.
SaleemJ. J.PlewW. R.SpeirR. C.HeroutJ.WilckN. R.RyanD. M., … PhillipsT. (2015).
Understanding barriers and facilitators to the use of clinical information systems for intensive care units and anesthesia record keeping: A rapid ethnography. International Journal of Medical Informatics,
84(7), 500–511. doi:10.1016/j. ijmedinf.2015.03.006
53.
SamuelsJ. G.McGrathR. J.FetzerS. J.MittalP.BourgoineD. (2015).
Using the electronic health record in nursing research: Challenges and opportunities. Western Journal of Nursing Research,
37(10), 1284–1294. doi:10.1177/0193945915576778
54.
SerG.RobertsonA.SheikhA. (2014).
A qualitative exploration of workarounds related to the implementation of national electronic health records in early adopter mental health hospitals. PLOS One,
9(1), e77669. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0077669
55.
SmaradottiB.FensliR. (2016).
User-centered design of health information technology. International Journal of Integrated Care,
16(5), S38. doi:10.5334/ijic.2587
56.
StevensonJ. E.NilssonG. C.PeterssonG. I.JohanssonP. E. (2010).
Nurses’ experience of using electronic patient records in everyday practice in acute/inpatient ward settings: A literature review. Health Informatics Journal,
16(1), 63–72. doi:10.1177/1460458209345901
StrudwickG.McGillis-HallL.NagleL.TrbovichP. (2018).
Acute care nurses’ perceptions of electronic health record use: A mixed methods study. Nursing Open,
5, 491–500. doi:10.1002/nop2.157
59.
TopazM.RonquilloC.PeltonenL. M.PruinelliL.SarmientoR. F.BadgerM. K., … LeeY. L. (2016).
Nurse informaticians report low satisfaction and multi-level concerns with electronic health records: Results from an international study. AMIA Annual Symposium Proceedings Archive,
2016, 2016–2025.
60.
VaismoradiM.TurunenH.BondasT. (2013).
Content analysis and thematic analysis: Implications for conducting a qualitative descriptive study.Nursing and Health Sciences,
15, 398–405. doi:10.1111/nhs.12048
61.
Van HouwelingenC. T. M.BarakatA.BootW. R.CharnessN.KortH. S. M. (2015).
Dutch nurses’ willingness to use home telehealth: Implications for practice and education. Journal of Gerontological Nursing,
41(4), 47–56. doi:10.3928/00989134-20141203-01
