Making electronic health records support quality management: A narrative review. (August 2017)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Triantafillou, Peter
• Is Part Of: International journal of medical informatics. Volume 104(2017)
• Page Start: 105
• Page End: 119
• Publication Date: 2017-08
• Subjects: Electronic health record -- Quality management -- Implementation -- Hospitals -- Cost-effectiveness; Medical informatics -- Periodicals; Information science -- Periodicals; Computers -- Periodicals; Medical technology -- Periodicals; Medical Informatics -- Periodicals; Technology, Medical -- Periodicals; Computers; Information science; Medical informatics; Medical technology; Electronic journals; Periodicals; Electronic journals; 610.285
• DOI: 10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2017.03.003
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1386-5056

Abstract

Abstract: Background: Since the 1990s many hospitals in the OECD countries have introduced electronic health record (EHR) systems. A number of studies have examined the factors impinging on EHR implementation. Others have studied the clinical efficacy of EHR. However, only few studies have explored the (intermediary) factors that make EHR systems conducive to quality management (QM). Objective: Undertake a narrative review of existing studies in order to identify and discuss the factors conducive to making EHR support three dimensions of QM: clinical outcomes, managerial monitoring and cost-effectiveness. Method: A narrative review of Web of Science, Cochrane, EBSCO, ProQuest, Scopus and three Nordic research databases. Limitation: most studies do not specify the type of EHR examined. Results: 39 studies were identified for analysis. 10 factors were found to be conducive to make EHR support QM. However, the contribution of EHR to the three specific dimensions of QM varied substantially. Most studies (29) included clinical outcomes. However, only half of these reported EHR to have a positive impact. Almost all the studies (36) dealt with the ability of EHR to enhance managerial monitoring of clinical activities, the far majority of which showed a positive relationship. Finally, only five dealt with cost-effectiveness of which two found positive effects. Discussion and conclusion: The findings resonates well with previous reviews, though two factors making EHR support QM seem new, namely: political goals and strategies, and integration of guidelines for clinical conduct. Lacking EHR type specification and diversity in study method imply that there is a strong need for further research on the factors that may make EHR may support QM.