Application Status of Evaluation Methodology of Electronic Medical Record: Evaluation of Bibliometric Analysis_Journal of Biomedical Engineering

Authors：

LINDan ¹ ,  LIUJialin ^1,2 , ZHANGRui ¹ , LIYong ¹ , HUANGTingting ¹

1. Department of Medical Informatics, West China Medical School, Sichuan University, Chengdu 610041, China;
2. Department of E.N.T., West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu 610041, China;

Corresponding author：

LIUJialin, Email: dljl8@163.com

Keywords：

electronic medical record; evaluation model/methodology; application

DOI：

10.7507/1001-5515.20150064

Video：

Export PDF Favorites Scan Get Citation

Abstract Full text Figures/Tables Video References Cited by

In order to provide a reference and theoretical guidance of the evaluation of electronic medical record (EMR) and establishment of evaluation system in China, we applied a bibliometric analysis to assess the application of methodologies used at home and abroad, as well as to summarize the advantages and disadvantages of them. We systematically searched international medical databases of Ovid-MEDLINE, EBSCOhost, EI, EMBASE, PubMed, IEEE, and China's medical databases of CBM and CNKI between Jan.1997 and Dec.2012. We also reviewed the reference lists of articles for relevant articles. We selected some qualified papers according to the pre-established inclusion and exclusion criteria, and did information extraction and analysis to the papers. Eventually, 1 736 papers were obtained from online database and other 16 articles from manual retrieval. Thirty-five articles met the inclusion and exclusion criteria and were retrieved and assessed. In the evaluation of EMR, US counted for 54.28% in the leading place, and Canada and Japan stood side by side and ranked second with 8.58%, respectively. For the application of evaluation methodology, Information System Success Model, Technology Acceptance Model (TAM), Innovation Diffusion Model and Cost-Benefit Access Model were widely applied with 25%, 20%, 12.5% and 10%, respectively. In this paper, we summarize our study on the application of methodologies of EMR evaluation, which can provide a reference to EMR evaluation in China.

Citation： LINDan, LIUJialin, ZHANGRui, LIYong, HUANGTingting. Application Status of Evaluation Methodology of Electronic Medical Record: Evaluation of Bibliometric Analysis. Journal of Biomedical Engineering, 2015, 32(2): 350-356. doi: 10.7507/1001-5515.20150064 Copy

1.	刘海一.医院电子病历应用水平的评价方法探讨[J].中国数字医学, 2011, 6(11):40-42.
2.	刘海一, 刘帆, 阴忆青.中美电子病历评价方法的比较研究[J].中国数字医学, 2012, 7(5):22-24, 27.
3.	相海泉.电子病历分级评价[J].中国信息界:e医疗, 2013(10):114.
4.	舒婷, 杨威.电子病历系统评价的未来展望[J].中国数字医学, 2012, 7(5):25-27.
5.	LIU L P, MA Q X. The impact of service level on the acceptance of application service oriented medical records[J]. Information & Management, 2005, 42(8):1121-1135.
6.	CHAN L, AMER M, ALDHABAN F. Adoption & evaluation of personal health record (PHR) system[C]//Portland International Conference on Management of Engineering & Technology, 2009. PICMET 2009. Portland, OR:2009:2986-2999.
7.	VISHWANATH A, SCAMURRA S D. Barriers to the adoption of electronic health records:using concept mapping to develop a comprehensive empirical model[J]. Health Informatics J, 2007, 13(2):119-134.
8.	HYUN S, JOHNSON S B, STETSON P D, et al. Development and evaluation of nursing user interface screens using multiple methods[J]. J Biomed Inform, 2009, 42(6):1004-1012.
9.	YARBROUGH A K, SMITH T B. Technology acceptance among physicians:a new take on TAM[J]. Med Care Res Rev, 2007, 64(6):650-672.
10.	MORTON M E, WIEDENBECK S. A framework for predicting EHR adoption attitudes:a physician survey[J]. Perspect Health Inf Manag, 2009, 6:1a.
11.	ASH J S. Factors affecting the diffusion of the Computer-Based Patient Record[C]//Proceedings of the AMIA Annual Fall Symposium. Bethesda:1997:682-686.
12.	SPIL T, KATSMA C P, STEGWEE R A, et al. Value, participation and quality of electronic health records in the Netherlands[C]//43rd Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences. New York, USA:2010:1-10.
13.	WILKINS M A. Factors influencing acceptance of electronic health records in hospitals[J]. Perspect Health Inf Manag, 2009, 6:1f.
14.	LONGO L, KANE B. A novel methodology for evaluating user interfaces in health care[C]//24th International Symposium on Computer-Based Medical Systems. USA:2011:1-6.
15.	WILLS M J, El-GAYAR O F, SARNIKAR S.Beyond meaningful use:a model for evaluating electronic health record success[C]//44th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS). New York, USA:2011:1-10.
16.	WILLS M J, EL-GAYAR O F, DEOKAR A V. Evaluating the impact of electronic health records on clinical reasoning performance[C]//45th Hawaii International Conference on System Science. New York, USA:2012:2830-2839.
17.	RAHIMI B, TIMPKA T, VIMARLUND V, et al. Organization-wide adoption of computerized provider order entry systems:a study based on diffusion of innovations theory[J]. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak, 2009, 9:52.
18.	LEE T T. Nurses' adoption of technology:application of Rogers' innovation-diffusion model[J]. Appl Nurs Res, 2004, 17(4):231-238.
19.	EMANI S, YAMIN C K, PETERS E, et al. Patient perceptions of a personal health record:a test of the diffusion of innovation model[J]. J Med Internet Res, 2012, 14(6):e150.
20.	DIXON B E, ZAFAR A, OVERHAGE J M. A framework for evaluating the costs, effort, and value of nationwide health information exchange[J]. J Am Med Inform Assoc, 2010, 17(3):295-301.
21.	SHAH S, KAELBER D C, VINCENT A, et al. A cost model for personal health records(PHRs)[C]//AMIA Annual Symposium Proceedings. Bethesda:2008:657-661.
22.	LI K, NAGANAWA S, WANG K, et al. Study of the cost-benefit analysis of electronic medical record systems in general hospital in China[J]. J Med Syst, 2012, 36(5):3283-3291.
23.	MORIN D, TOURIGNY A, PELLETIER D, et al. Seniors' views on the use of electronic health records[J]. Inform Prim Care, 2005, 13(2):125-133.
24.	ARCHER N, FEVRIER-THOMAS U, LOKKER C, et al. Personal health records:a scoping review[J]. J Am Med Inform Assoc, 2011, 18(4):515-522.
25.	OTIENO G O, HINAKO T, MOTOHIRO A, et al. Measuring effectiveness of electronic medical records systems:towards building a composite index for benchmarking hospitals[J]. Int J Med Inform, 2008, 77(10):657-669.
26.	OTIENO O G, TOYAMA H, ASONUMA M, et al. Nurses' views on the use, quality and user satisfaction with electronic medical records:questionnaire development[J]. J Adv Nurs, 2007, 60(2):209-219.
27.	CHANG I C, LI Y C, WU T Y, et al. Electronic medical record quality and its impact on user satisfaction-Healthcare providers' point of view[J]. Gov Inf Q, 2012, 29(2):235-242.
28.	LAU F, PRICE M, BOYD J, et al. Impact of electronic medical record on physician practice in office settings:a systematic review[J]. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak, 2012, 12:10.
29.	SU Y Y, FULCHER J, KHIN T W, et al. Evaluating the implementation of Electronic Medical Record (EMR) Systems from the Perspective of Health Professional[C]//IEEE 8th International Conference on Computer and Information Technology Workshops. USA:2008:589-594.
30.	PALACIO C, HARRISON J P, GARETS D. Benchmarking electronic medical records initiatives in the US:a conceptual model[J]. J Med Syst, 2010, 34(3):273-279.
31.	HILLESTAD R, BIGELOW J, BOWER A, et al. Can electronic medical record systems transform health care? Potential health benefits, savings, and costs[J]. Health Aff (Millwood), 2005, 24(5):1103-1117.
32.	刘海一, 马琏.一种评估医院信息系统应用水平的方法[J].中国数字医学, 2010, 5(3):16-19.
33.	KAELBER D, PAN E C. The value of personal health record(PHR)systems[C]//AMIA Annual Symposium Proceedings. Bethesda:2008:343-347.
34.	CALLEN J L, BRAITHWAITE J, WESTBROOK J I. Contextual implementation model:a framework for assisting clinical information system implementations[J]. J Am Med Inform Assoc, 2008, 15(2):255-262.
35.	ASH J S, GORMAN P N, LAVELLE M, et al. Multiple perspectives on physician order entry[C]//Proceedings of the AMIA Symposium. Bethesda:2000:27-31.
36.	CHOQUET R, QOUIYD S, OUAGNE D, et al. The information quality triangle:a methodology to assess clinical information quality[J]. Stud Health Technol Inform, 2010, 160(Pt 1):699-703.
37.	JÄDERLUND HAGSTEDT L, RUDEBECK C E, PETERSSON G. Usability of computerised physician order entry in primary care:assessing ePrescribing with a new evaluation model[J]. Inform Prim Care, 2011, 19(3):161-168.
38.	KAZLEY A S, OZCAN Y A. Organizational and environmental determinants of hospital EMR adoption:a National study[J]. J Med Syst, 2007, 31(5):375-384.
39.	BLUMENTHAL D, TAVENNER M. The "meaningful use" regulation for electronic health records[J]. N Engl J Med, 2010, 363(6):501-504.
40.	BROWN S A, DENNIS A R, VENKATESH V. Predicting collaboration technology use:Integrating technology adoption and collaboration research[J]. J Man Inform Syst, 2010, 27(2):9-54.
41.	HERSH W, WRIGHT A. What workforce is needed to implement the health information technology agenda? analysis from the HIMSS analytics^TMdatabase[C]//AMIA Annual Symposium Proceedings. Bethesda:2008:303-307.

1. 刘海一.医院电子病历应用水平的评价方法探讨[J].中国数字医学, 2011, 6(11):40-42.
2. 刘海一, 刘帆, 阴忆青.中美电子病历评价方法的比较研究[J].中国数字医学, 2012, 7(5):22-24, 27.
3. 相海泉.电子病历分级评价[J].中国信息界:e医疗, 2013(10):114.
4. 舒婷, 杨威.电子病历系统评价的未来展望[J].中国数字医学, 2012, 7(5):25-27.
5. LIU L P, MA Q X. The impact of service level on the acceptance of application service oriented medical records[J]. Information & Management, 2005, 42(8):1121-1135.
6. CHAN L, AMER M, ALDHABAN F. Adoption & evaluation of personal health record (PHR) system[C]//Portland International Conference on Management of Engineering & Technology, 2009. PICMET 2009. Portland, OR:2009:2986-2999.
7. VISHWANATH A, SCAMURRA S D. Barriers to the adoption of electronic health records:using concept mapping to develop a comprehensive empirical model[J]. Health Informatics J, 2007, 13(2):119-134.
8. HYUN S, JOHNSON S B, STETSON P D, et al. Development and evaluation of nursing user interface screens using multiple methods[J]. J Biomed Inform, 2009, 42(6):1004-1012.
9. YARBROUGH A K, SMITH T B. Technology acceptance among physicians:a new take on TAM[J]. Med Care Res Rev, 2007, 64(6):650-672.
10. MORTON M E, WIEDENBECK S. A framework for predicting EHR adoption attitudes:a physician survey[J]. Perspect Health Inf Manag, 2009, 6:1a.
11. ASH J S. Factors affecting the diffusion of the Computer-Based Patient Record[C]//Proceedings of the AMIA Annual Fall Symposium. Bethesda:1997:682-686.
12. SPIL T, KATSMA C P, STEGWEE R A, et al. Value, participation and quality of electronic health records in the Netherlands[C]//43rd Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences. New York, USA:2010:1-10.
13. WILKINS M A. Factors influencing acceptance of electronic health records in hospitals[J]. Perspect Health Inf Manag, 2009, 6:1f.
14. LONGO L, KANE B. A novel methodology for evaluating user interfaces in health care[C]//24th International Symposium on Computer-Based Medical Systems. USA:2011:1-6.
15. WILLS M J, El-GAYAR O F, SARNIKAR S.Beyond meaningful use:a model for evaluating electronic health record success[C]//44th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS). New York, USA:2011:1-10.
16. WILLS M J, EL-GAYAR O F, DEOKAR A V. Evaluating the impact of electronic health records on clinical reasoning performance[C]//45th Hawaii International Conference on System Science. New York, USA:2012:2830-2839.
17. RAHIMI B, TIMPKA T, VIMARLUND V, et al. Organization-wide adoption of computerized provider order entry systems:a study based on diffusion of innovations theory[J]. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak, 2009, 9:52.
18. LEE T T. Nurses' adoption of technology:application of Rogers' innovation-diffusion model[J]. Appl Nurs Res, 2004, 17(4):231-238.
19. EMANI S, YAMIN C K, PETERS E, et al. Patient perceptions of a personal health record:a test of the diffusion of innovation model[J]. J Med Internet Res, 2012, 14(6):e150.
20. DIXON B E, ZAFAR A, OVERHAGE J M. A framework for evaluating the costs, effort, and value of nationwide health information exchange[J]. J Am Med Inform Assoc, 2010, 17(3):295-301.
21. SHAH S, KAELBER D C, VINCENT A, et al. A cost model for personal health records(PHRs)[C]//AMIA Annual Symposium Proceedings. Bethesda:2008:657-661.
22. LI K, NAGANAWA S, WANG K, et al. Study of the cost-benefit analysis of electronic medical record systems in general hospital in China[J]. J Med Syst, 2012, 36(5):3283-3291.
23. MORIN D, TOURIGNY A, PELLETIER D, et al. Seniors' views on the use of electronic health records[J]. Inform Prim Care, 2005, 13(2):125-133.
24. ARCHER N, FEVRIER-THOMAS U, LOKKER C, et al. Personal health records:a scoping review[J]. J Am Med Inform Assoc, 2011, 18(4):515-522.
25. OTIENO G O, HINAKO T, MOTOHIRO A, et al. Measuring effectiveness of electronic medical records systems:towards building a composite index for benchmarking hospitals[J]. Int J Med Inform, 2008, 77(10):657-669.
26. OTIENO O G, TOYAMA H, ASONUMA M, et al. Nurses' views on the use, quality and user satisfaction with electronic medical records:questionnaire development[J]. J Adv Nurs, 2007, 60(2):209-219.
27. CHANG I C, LI Y C, WU T Y, et al. Electronic medical record quality and its impact on user satisfaction-Healthcare providers' point of view[J]. Gov Inf Q, 2012, 29(2):235-242.
28. LAU F, PRICE M, BOYD J, et al. Impact of electronic medical record on physician practice in office settings:a systematic review[J]. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak, 2012, 12:10.
29. SU Y Y, FULCHER J, KHIN T W, et al. Evaluating the implementation of Electronic Medical Record (EMR) Systems from the Perspective of Health Professional[C]//IEEE 8th International Conference on Computer and Information Technology Workshops. USA:2008:589-594.
30. PALACIO C, HARRISON J P, GARETS D. Benchmarking electronic medical records initiatives in the US:a conceptual model[J]. J Med Syst, 2010, 34(3):273-279.
31. HILLESTAD R, BIGELOW J, BOWER A, et al. Can electronic medical record systems transform health care? Potential health benefits, savings, and costs[J]. Health Aff (Millwood), 2005, 24(5):1103-1117.
32. 刘海一, 马琏.一种评估医院信息系统应用水平的方法[J].中国数字医学, 2010, 5(3):16-19.
33. KAELBER D, PAN E C. The value of personal health record(PHR)systems[C]//AMIA Annual Symposium Proceedings. Bethesda:2008:343-347.
34. CALLEN J L, BRAITHWAITE J, WESTBROOK J I. Contextual implementation model:a framework for assisting clinical information system implementations[J]. J Am Med Inform Assoc, 2008, 15(2):255-262.
35. ASH J S, GORMAN P N, LAVELLE M, et al. Multiple perspectives on physician order entry[C]//Proceedings of the AMIA Symposium. Bethesda:2000:27-31.
36. CHOQUET R, QOUIYD S, OUAGNE D, et al. The information quality triangle:a methodology to assess clinical information quality[J]. Stud Health Technol Inform, 2010, 160(Pt 1):699-703.
37. JÄDERLUND HAGSTEDT L, RUDEBECK C E, PETERSSON G. Usability of computerised physician order entry in primary care:assessing ePrescribing with a new evaluation model[J]. Inform Prim Care, 2011, 19(3):161-168.
38. KAZLEY A S, OZCAN Y A. Organizational and environmental determinants of hospital EMR adoption:a National study[J]. J Med Syst, 2007, 31(5):375-384.
39. BLUMENTHAL D, TAVENNER M. The "meaningful use" regulation for electronic health records[J]. N Engl J Med, 2010, 363(6):501-504.
40. BROWN S A, DENNIS A R, VENKATESH V. Predicting collaboration technology use:Integrating technology adoption and collaboration research[J]. J Man Inform Syst, 2010, 27(2):9-54.
41. HERSH W, WRIGHT A. What workforce is needed to implement the health information technology agenda? analysis from the HIMSS analytics^TMdatabase[C]//AMIA Annual Symposium Proceedings. Bethesda:2008:303-307.

Journal of Biomedical Engineering

Application Status of Evaluation Methodology of Electronic Medical Record: Evaluation of Bibliometric Analysis

Abstract Full text Figures/Tables Video References Cited by

Previous Article

Next Article

Format

Content