International Journal of Medical Informatics
Volume 81, Issue 2 , Pages 98-113 , February 2012

Physicians’ experiences of participation in healthcare IT development in Finland: Willing but not able

  • Susanna Martikainen

      Affiliations

    • Healthcare Information Systems Research and Development, School of Computing, University of Eastern Finland, Kuopio, Finland
    • Corresponding Author InformationCorresponding author at: Healthcare Information Systems Research and Development, School of Computing, University of Eastern Finland, P.O. Box 1627, FI-70211 Kuopio, Finland. Tel.: +358 443242455.
    • ,
  • Johanna Viitanen

      Affiliations

    • Strategic Usability Research Group, School of Science and Technology, Aalto University, Espoo, Finland
    • ,
  • Mikko Korpela

      Affiliations

    • Healthcare Information Systems Research and Development, School of Computing, University of Eastern Finland, Kuopio, Finland
    • ,
  • Tinja Lääveri

      Affiliations

    • Department of Medicine, Helsinki University Central Hospital and HUS-ICT, Helsinki, Finland

Received 1 March 2011 ,Revised 31 August 2011 ,Accepted 31 August 2011.

References 

  1. Meade B, Buckley D, Bolan M. What factors affect the use of electronic patient records by Irish GPs?. Int. J. Med. Inform. 2009;78:551–558
  2. Linder JA, Schnipper JL, Tsurikove R, Melnikas AJ, Volk LA, Middleton B. Barriers to electronic health record use during patient visits. Proc. AMIA. 2006;499–503
  3. Likourezos A, Chalfin DB, Murphy DG, Sommer B, Darcy K, Davidson SJ. Physician and nurse satisfaction with an electronic medical record system. J. Emerg. Med. 2004;27:419–424
  4. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, 2010 Preliminary Comparative Results: Medical Office Survey on Patient Safety Culture [Internet]. AHQR, Rockville, MD, 2010, Publication No. 11-0015-EF [cited 2010 November 24]. Available from: http://www.ahrq.gov/qual/mosurvey10/moresults10.htm.
  5. Davis K, McEvoy Doty M, Shea K, Stremikis K. Health information technology and physician perceptions of quality of care and satisfaction. Health Policy. 2009;90:239–246
  6. Korhonen MJ, Hartikainen S. Löytyykö potilaan lääkitys sähköisestä sairauskertomuksesta?. Finn. Med. J. 2009;1–2:60–62(In Finnish)
  7. Lääveri T. Mitä kliinikko odottaa sähköisten potilaskertomusten käytettävyydeltä?. Nuori lääkäri. 2008;7:(In Finnish)
  8. Lääveri T. Potilaskertomusjärjestelmien käytettävyysselvitys osoitti: Lääkärien mielipiteitä ei ole kuunneltu. Finn. Med. J. 2008;63(6 Suppl. 1):3;(In Finnish)
  9. Lääveri T, Virtanen A, Paajanen H, Ahtola H, Konki K. Potilaskertomusjärjestelmien arvioinnit. Finn. Med. J. 2008;63(6 Suppl. 1):8–31(In Finnish)
  10. Marin P. Potilastietojärjestelmä lääkärin apuna?. Nuori lääkäri. 2006;12:(In Finnish)
  11. Vänskä J, Viitanen J, Hyppönen H, Elovainio M, Winblad I, Reponen J, et al. Doctors critical of electronic patient record systems. Finn. Med. J. 2010;50–52:4177–4183(In Finnish, English summary)
  12. Viitanen J, Hyppönen H, Lääveri T, Vänskä J, Reponen J, Winblad I. National questionnaire study on clinical ICT systems proofs: physicians suffer from poor usability. Int. J. Med. Inform. 2011;80:708–725
  13. In:  Bardram J,  Mihailidis A,  Dadong W editor. Pervasive Computing in Healthcare. USA: CRC Press, Taylor & Francis Group; 2006;
  14. Lenz R, Elstner T, Siegele H, Kuhn KA. A practical approach to process support in health information systems. J. Am. Med. Inform. Assoc. 2002;9(6):571–585
  15. PAHO=Pan American Health Organization, Setting up Healthcare Services Information Systems: A Guide for Requirement Analysis, Application Specification, and Procurement. Part A—General and Institutional Framework for Development of Healthcare Information Systems. Pan American Health Organization, PAHO Library Cataloguing in Publication Data. PAHO, Washington, DC, 1999 [cited 2011 February 9]. Available online: http://www.virtual.epm.br/material/healthcare/frame1.htm.
  16. Davis LS. Problems facing large health information systems. In: Proceedings of the Annual ACM Conference. ACM, New York, USA. 1973;
  17. Nemeth C, Nunnally M, ÓConnor M, Klock PA, Cook R. Getting to the point: developing IT for the sharp end of healthcare. J. Biomed. Inform. 2005;38:18–25
  18. Nykänen P, Karimaa E. Success and failure factors in the regional health information system design process—result from a constructive evaluation study. Methods Inf. Med. 2006;45(1):85–89
  19. Toivanen M, Luukkonen I, Ensio A, Häkkinen H, Ikävalko P, Jaatinen J, et al. Kohti suunnitelmallisia muutoksia Opas terveydenhuollon tietojärjestelmien toimintalähtöiseen kehittämiseen. Kuopio: Kuopion yliopisto; 2007;(In Finnish)
  20. Johnson CM, Johnson TR, Zhang J. A user-centered framework for redesign healthcare interfaces. J. Biomed. Inform. 2005;38:75–87
  21. Christensen T, Faxvaag A, Loerum H, Grimsmo A. Norwegians GPs’ use of electronic patient record systems. Int. J. Med. Inform. 2009;78(12):808–814
  22. Zhang J. Human-centered computing in health information systems. Part 1. Analysis and design. Guest editorial. J. Biomed. Inform. 2005;38:1–3
  23. Bleich HL, Slack WV. Reflections on electronic medical records: when doctors will use them and when they will not. Int. J. Med. Inform. 2009;79:1–4
  24. De Rouck S, Jacobs A, Leys M. A methodology for shifting the focus of e-Health support design onto user needs: a case in the homecare field. Int. J. Med. Inform. 2008;77(9):589–601
  25. Van der Meijden MJ, Tange HJ, Troost J, Hasman A. Determinants of success of inpatient clinical information systems: a literature review. JAMIA. 2003;10(3):235–243
  26. Peute LW, Spithoven R, Bakker PJ, Jaspers MW. Usability studies on interactive health information systems: where do we stand?. Stud. Health Technol. Inform. 2008;136:327–332
  27. Shah SGS, Robinson I. User involvement in healthcare technology development and assessment: structured literature review. Int. J. Health Care Qual. Assur. 2006;19(6):500–515
  28. Clemensen J, Larsen SB, Kyng M, Kirkevold M. Participatory design in health sciences: using cooperative experimental methods in developing health services and computer technology. Qual. Health Res. 2007;17(1):122–130
  29. Pilemalm S, Timpka T. Third generation participatory design in health informatics—making user participation applicable to large-scale information system projects. J. Biomed. Inform. 2007;41:327–339
  30. J. Kirakowski, The Use of Questionnaire Methods for Usability Assessment. Background Notes on the SUMI Questionnaire, 1994 [cited 2010 October 26]. Available from: http://sumi.ucc.ie/index.html.
  31. Brooke J. SUS: a “quick and dirty” usability scale. In:  Jordan P,  Thomas B,  Weerdmeester T,  McClelland A editor. Usability Evaluation in Industry. London: Taylor and Francis; 1996;
  32. Yksityinen palvelutuotanto sosiaali-ja terveydenhuollossa, The Official Statistics of Finland, Social Security, National Institute for Health and Welfare, Helsinki [cited 2011 February 20]. Available from: www.thl.fi/yksityinenpalvelutuotanto.
  33. P. Doupi, P. Hämäläinen, P. Ruotsalainen, eHealth Strategy and Implementation Activities in Finland. Report in the Framework of the eHealth ERA Project. E-report 2007 [cited 2010 November 25]. Available from: http://www.ehealth-era.org/database/documents/ERA_Reports/FINLAND%20country%20report%20sep07_FINAL.pdf.
  34. Winblad I, Reponen J, Hämäläinen P, Kangas M. Informaatio-ja kommunikaatioteknologian käyttö Suomen terveydenhuollossa vuonna 2007. Stakes Raportteja 37/2008. Helsinki: Valopaino Oy; 2008;
  35. Reponen J, Winblad I, Hämäläinen P. Current status of National eHealth and Telemedicine Development in Finland. Stud. Health Technol. Inform. 2008;134:199–208
  36. A.K. Iivari, P. Ruotsalainen, eHealth Roadmap – Finland, Ministery of Social Affairs and Health, Finland, Helsinki, Finland, 2007 [cited 2010 October 26]. Available from: http://pre20090115.stm.fi/pr1172737292558/passthru.pdf.
  37. World Health Organization, Building Foundations eHealth in Europe. Report of the WHO Global Observatory for eHealth. Electronic report 2008, 82–83 [cited 2010 October 26]. Available from: http://www.who.int/goe/BFeuroFull.pdf.
  38. S. Walldén, S. Peltomäki, S. Martikainen, Tampereen kaupungin Pegasos-järjestelmän käytettävyystutkimus murtumapotilaan hoitoketjussa. University of Tampere, Finland, 2007 (publication B-2007-3) [cited 2010 November 3]. Available from: http://www.cs.uta.fi/reports/bsarja/B-2007-3.pdf.
  39. S. Walldén, S. Peltomäki, S. Martikainen, Pirkanmaan Fiale-aluetietojärjestelän heuristinen läpikäynti, University of Tampere, Finland, 2007 (publication B-2007-2) [cited 2010 November 3]. Available from: http://www.cs.uta.fi/reports/bsarja/B-2007-2.pdf.
  40. Winblad I, Hyppönen H, Salo S, Reinikainen K, Reponen J. Do computers steal too much attention during physician consultations?. Finn. Med. J. 2009;46:3956–3959(In Finnish English summary)
  41. P. Nykänen, J. Viitanen, A. Kuusisto, Hoitotyön kansallisen kirjaamismallin ja hoitokertomusten käytettävyys, Project report (In Finnish), University of Tampere, Finland, 2010 (publication D-2010-7) [cited 2010 November 3]. Available from: http://www.cs.uta.fi/reports/dsarja/D-2010-7.pdf.
  42. Shah SGS, Robinson I. Benefits of and barriers to involving users in medical device technology development and evaluation. Int. J. Technol. Assess. Health Care. 2007;23(1):131–137
  43. Martikainen S, Ikävalko P, Korpela M. Participatory interaction design in user requirements specification in healthcare. In:  Safran C,  Reti S,  Marin HF editor. Medinfo 2010—Proc of the 13th World Congress on Medical Informatics. IOS Press, Amsterdam, September 12–15. 2010;p. 304–308
  44. Heeks R. Health information systems: failure success and improvisation. Int. J. Med. Inform. 2006;75:125–137
  45. Edsall RL, Adler KG. An EHR user-satisfaction survey: advice from 408 family physicians. Fam. Pract. Manag. 2005;12(9):29–35
  46. D. Armijo, C. McDonnell, K. Werner, Electronic Health Record Usability: Interface Design Considerations, AHRQ Publication No 09(10)-0091-2-EF, October 2009 [cited 2010 November 3]. Available from: http://healthit.ahrq.gov/portal/server.pt/gateway/PTARGS_0_907505_0_0_18/09(10)-0091-2-EF.pdf.
  47. Edwards PJ, Moloney KP, Jacko JA, Sainfort F. Evaluating usability of a commercial electronic health record: a case study. Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud. 2008;66:718–728
  48. Winblad I, Hyppönen H, Vänskä J, Reponen J, Viitanen J, Lääveri T. Electronic patient record systems evaluated by make of product: further development required in all cases. Finn. Med. J. 2010;50–52:4185–4194(In Finnish English summary)
  49. Finnish Physicians’ Experiences with Computer-supported Patient Information Exchange and Communication in Clinical Work, International Journal of Electronic Healthcare (IJEH)’s Special issue on “Communication Between Healthcare Services Users and Providers Using Electronic Sources”, in press.
  50. Häkkinen H, Korpela M. A participatory assessment of IS integration needs in maternity clinics using activity theory. Int. J. Med. Inform. 2007;76:843–849
  51. Samaras GM, Horst RL. A system engineering perspective on the human-centred design of health information systems. J. Biomed. Inform. 2005;38:61–74
  52. Coeira E. Guide to Health Informatics. 2nd ed.. London: Arnold Publication; 2003;
  53. Weber RP. Basic Content Analysis Series: Qualitative Applications in the Social Sciences. 2nd ed.. USA: SAGE University Paper, Sage Publications Inc.; 1990;
  54. I. Kunnamo, Tietotekniikan tulevaisuuden näkymiä lääkärin näkökulmasta. MedVaasa: Lääketieteellisen tekniikan kehittäminen Vaasan seudulla (October 6, 2006) [cited 2011 February 20]. Available from: http://lipas.uwasa.fi/∼TAU/memos/Memo061006/Esitykset/Kunnamo_Vaasa_061006.pdf.
  55. European Authorized Representative Center, Medical Device Directive (MDD 93/42/EEC), Published 1998 and updated 2007 [cited 2010 November 24]. Available from: http://obelis.net/directives/93-42-eec-mdd-medical-device-directive/.

PII: S1386-5056(11)00178-X

doi: 10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2011.08.014

International Journal of Medical Informatics
Volume 81, Issue 2 , Pages 98-113 , February 2012

Article Tools

* Image Usage & Resolution