Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2023 Jul 10:10:e45598.
doi: 10.2196/45598.

Involving Health Care Professionals in the Development of Electronic Health Records: Scoping Review

Affiliations

Involving Health Care Professionals in the Development of Electronic Health Records: Scoping Review

Theresa Sophie Busse et al. JMIR Hum Factors. .

Abstract

Background: Electronic health records (EHRs) are a promising approach to document and map (complex) health information gathered in health care worldwide. However, possible unintended consequences during use, which can occur owing to low usability or the lack of adaption to existing workflows (eg, high cognitive load), may pose a challenge. To prevent this, the involvement of users in the development of EHRs is crucial and growing. Overall, involvement is designed to be very multifaceted, for example, in terms of the timing, frequency, or even methods used to capture user preferences.

Objective: Setting, users and their needs, and the context and practice of health care must be considered in the design and subsequent implementation of EHRs. Many different approaches to user involvement exist, each requiring a variety of methodological choices. The aim of the study was to provide an overview of the existing forms of user involvement and the circumstances they need and to provide support for the planning of new involvement processes.

Methods: We conducted a scoping review to provide a database for future projects on which design of inclusion is worthwhile and to show the diversity of reporting. Using a very broad search string, we searched the PubMed, CINAHL, and Scopus databases. In addition, we searched Google Scholar. Hits were screened according to scoping review methodology and then examined, focusing on methods and materials, participants, frequency and design of the development, and competencies of the researchers involved.

Results: In total, 70 articles were included in the final analysis. There was a wide range of methods of involvement. Physicians and nurses were the most frequently included groups and, in most cases, were involved only once in the process. The approach of involvement (eg, co-design) was not specified in most of the studies (44/70, 63%). Further qualitative deficiencies in the reporting were evident in the presentation of the competences of members of the research and development teams. Think-aloud sessions, interviews, and prototypes were frequently used.

Conclusions: This review provides insights into the diversity of health care professionals' involvement in the development of EHRs. It provides an overview of the different approaches in various fields of health care. However, it also shows the necessity of considering quality standards in the development of EHRs together with future users and the need for reporting this in future studies.

Keywords: digital technology; electronic health records; electronic medical records; stakeholder participation; technology development; user-centered design.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Conflicts of Interest: None declared.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Flow diagram of the study selection process. EHR: electronic health record.

References

    1. Gonçalves AS, Bertram N, Amelung V. European Scorecard zum Stand der Implementierung der elektronischen Patientenakte auf nationaler Ebene. Stiftung Muench. 2018. [2022-07-21]. https://www.stiftung-muench.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/Scorecard-fin... .
    1. Al-Aswad AM, Brownsell S, Palmer R, Nichol JP. A review paper of the current status of electronic health records adoption worldwide: the gap between developed and developing countries. J Health Inform Dev Ctries. 2013;7(2):153–64. https://www.jhidc.org/index.php/jhidc/article/view/106/146
    1. Campanella P, Lovato E, Marone C, Fallacara L, Mancuso A, Ricciardi W, Specchia ML. The impact of electronic health records on healthcare quality: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur J Public Health. 2016 Feb;26(1):60–4. doi: 10.1093/eurpub/ckv122.ckv122 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Uslu A, Stausberg J. Value of the electronic medical record for hospital care: update from the literature. J Med Internet Res. 2021 Dec 23;23(12):e26323. doi: 10.2196/26323. https://www.jmir.org/2021/12/e26323/ v23i12e26323 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Atasoy H, Greenwood BN, McCullough JS. The digitization of patient care: a review of the effects of electronic health records on health care quality and utilization. Annu Rev Public Health. 2019 Apr 01;40:487–500. doi: 10.1146/annurev-publhealth-040218-044206. - DOI - PubMed

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources