Journal Home
Search for

Volume 78, Issue 9, Pages 618-628 (September 2009)


View previous. 5 of 7 View next.

Exploring the persistence of paper with the electronic health record

Jason J. SaleemabcCorresponding Author Informationemail addressemail addressemail address, Alissa L. Russab, Connie F. Justiceabd, Heather Hagga, Patricia R. Ebrighte, Peter A. Woodbridgefg, Bradley N. Doebbelingabh

Received 28 August 2008; received in revised form 6 February 2009; accepted 9 April 2009. published online 22 May 2009.

Abstract 

Objective

Healthcare organizations are increasingly implementing electronic health records (EHRs) and other related health information technology (IT). Even in institutions which have long adopted these computerized systems, employees continue to rely on paper to complete their work. The objective of this study was to explore and understand human-technology integration factors that may be causing employees to rely on paper alternatives to the EHR.

Methods

We conducted semi-structured interviews with 20 key-informants in a large Veterans Affairs Medical Center (VAMC), with a fully implemented EHR, to understand the use of paper-based alternatives. Participants included clinicians, administrators, and IT specialists across several service areas in the medical center.

Results

We found 11 distinct categories of paper-based workarounds to the use of the EHR. Paper use related to the following: (1) efficiency; (2) knowledge/skill/ease of use; (3) memory; (4) sensorimotor preferences; (5) awareness; (6) task specificity; (7) task complexity; (8) data organization; (9) longitudinal data processes; (10) trust; and (11) security. We define each of these and provide examples that demonstrate how these categories promoted paper use in spite of a fully implemented EHR.

Conclusions

In several cases, paper served as an important tool and assisted healthcare employees in their work. In other cases, paper use circumvented the intended EHR design, introduced potential gaps in documentation, and generated possible paths to medical error. We discuss implications of these findings for EHR design and implementation.

a VA HSR&D Center on Implementing Evidence-Based Practice, Roudebush VAMC, Indianapolis, IN, United States

b Indiana University (IU) Center for Health Services & Outcomes Research, Regenstrief Institute, Inc., Indianapolis, IN, United States

c Department of Electrical & Computer Engineering, Indiana University-Purdue University at Indianapolis (IUPUI), Indianapolis, IN, United States

d Department of Computer Information Technology, Indiana University-Purdue University at Indianapolis (IUPUI), Indianapolis, IN, United States

e Department of Adult Health, IU School of Nursing, Indianapolis, IN, United States

f VA Nebraska Western Iowa Heath Care System, Omaha, NE, United States

g University of Nebraska Medical Center, College of Public Health, Omaha, NE, United States

h Department of Medicine, IU School of Medicine, Indianapolis, IN, United States

Corresponding Author InformationCorresponding author at: VA HSR&D Center of Excellence on Implementing Evidenced-Based Practice (CIEBP), Richard L. Roudebush VA Medical Center (11-H), 1481 West Tenth Street, Indianapolis, IN 46202, United States. Tel.: +1 317 988 2616; fax: +1 317 988 3222.

PII: S1386-5056(09)00068-9

doi:10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2009.04.001


View previous. 5 of 7 View next.