Journal of Medical Systems

, Volume 31, Issue 6, pp 489–496 | Cite as

Exploring Physician Adoption of EMRs: A Multi-Case Analysis

Original Paper

Abstract

The adoption of new technology within healthcare has been promoted as a way to reduce costs and increase efficiencies as well as improve quality. The literature has documented a significant number of implementation failures by large groups and hospitals with access to IT skills and resources. Given the low adoption rate among physicians, the challenges facing small practices can be daunting. While financial and technical barriers have been explored at the physician level, the actual implementation challenges facing small groups have not been explored. This paper presents a qualitative three case analysis of physician groups that have employed EMRs and the pre and post adoption insights. Results show that planning was a key common variable missing; the anticipated downtime was longer than expected and the workflow disruption and maintenance costs were underestimated.

Keywords

EMR adoption Planning Physicians challenges Implementation 

References

  1. 1.
    Raghupathi, W., and Tan, J., Strategic IT applications in health care. Commun. ACM. 45(12):56–61, 2002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Brown, N., Driving EMR Adoption: Making EMRs a Sustainable, Profitable Investment. Health Manag. Technol. 26(5):47–48, 2005.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Thong, J. Y. L., An integrated model of information systems adoption in small businesses. J. Manage. Inf. Syst. 15(4):187–214, 1999.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Ford, E. W., Menachemi, N., and Phillips, M. T., Predicting the adoption of electronic health records by physicians: When will health care be paperless? J Am Med Inform Assoc. 13:106–112, 2006.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Lee, S.-Y. D., and Alexander, J. A., Managing Hospitals in turbulent times: Do organizational changes improve hospital survival. Health Serv. Res. 34(4):923–946, 1999.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Madden, C. W., Excess capacity: Markets, regulation, and values. Health Serv. Res. 33(6):1651–1668, 1999.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Friedman, L. H., Goes, J. B., and Orr, R., The timing of medical technology acquisition: strategic decision making in turbulent environments. J. Healthc. Manag. 45(5):317–331, 2000.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Huston, T., Security issues for implementation of e-medical records. Commun. ACM 44(9):89–94, 2001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Iacovou, C. L., Benbasat, I., and Dexter, A. S., Electronic data interchange and small organizations: adoption & impact of technology. MIS Quarterly 19(4):465–485, 1995.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Singh, R., Servoss, T., Kalsman, M., Fox, C., and Singh, G., Estimating impacts on safety caused by the introduction of electronic medical records in primary care. Informatics in Primary Care 12(4):235–242, 2004.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Meinert, D. B., Resistance to electronic medical records (EMRs): A barrier to improved quality of care. Issues in Informing Science and Information Technology 2:493–504, 2005.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Keil, M., Mann, J., and Rai, A., Why software projects escalate: An empirical analysis and test of four theoretical models. MIS Quarterly 24(4):631–664, 2000.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Valdes, I., Kibbe, D. C., Tolleson, G., Kunik, M. E., and Petersen, L. A., Barriers to proliferation of electronic medical records. Informatics in Primary Care 12(1):3–9, 2004.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Foundation WKK. Using logic models to bring together planning, evaluation, & action: Logic model development guide. Battle Creek, MI; 2001.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Randeree, E., Judd, S., Kishore, R., and Rao, H. R., Antecedents to the adoption of ASPs in Healthcare. Journal of Health Information Management 17(4):67–71, 2003.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Liu, L., and Ma, Q., Emerging e-business technologies for electronic medical records. Int. J. Healthc. Technol. Manag. 5(3/4/5):157–178, 2003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Bates, D. W., Ebell, M., Gotlieb, E., Zapp, J., and Mullins, H. C., A proposal for electronic medical records in U.S. primary care. J. Am. Med. Inform. Assoc. 10(1):1–10, 2003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Ang, S., and Straub, D. W., Production and Transaction economies and IS outsourcing: A study of the U.S. banking industry. MIS Quarterly 22(4):535–552, 1998.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Edsall, R. L., Are electronic records catching on? Fam. Pract. Manag. 11(3):13, 2004.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Paul, D. L., Reuben, R., and McDaniel, J., A field study of the effect of interpersonal trust on virtual collaborative relationship performance. MIS Quarterly 28(2):183–227, 2004.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Ring, P. S., and Van de Ven, A., Developmental processes of cooperative interorganizational relationships. Acad. Manage. Rev. 19(1):90–119, 1994.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Gefen, D., Karahanna, E., and Straub, D. W., Trust and TAM in online shopping: An integrated model. MIS Quarterly 27(1):51–90, 2003.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Jeffries, F. L., and Reed, R., Trust and adaptation in relational contracting. Acad. Manage. Rev. 25(4):873–882, 2000.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Hart, P. J., and Saunders, C. S., Emerging electronic partnerships: antecedents and dimensions of EDI use from the supplier’s perspective. J. Manage. Inf. Syst. 14(4):87–111, 1998.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Sabherwal, R., The role of trust in outsourced is development project. Commun. ACM 42(2):80–86, 1999.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Barthelemy, J., The hard and soft sides of IT outsourcing management. Eur. Manag. J. 21(5):539–548, 2003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Heart, T., and Pliskin, N., Is E-commerce of IT Application services (ASP) alive and well? JITTA 3(4):33–41, 2001.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Zaheer, A., McEvily, B., and Perrone, V., Does trust matter? Exploring the effects of interorganizational and interpersonal trust on performance. Organ. Sci. 9(2):141–159, 1998.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Uzzi, B., Social structure and competition in interfirm networks: The paradox of embeddedness. Adm. Sci. Q. 42(1):35–67, 1997.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Randeree, E., Kishore, R., and Rao, H. R., Exploring the moderating effect of trust and privacy in the adoption of application service providers in the healthcare industry. Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences; 2005; Hawaii; 2005, 1–10.Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Kurtz, G., EMR confidentiality and information security. J. Healthc. Inf. Manag. 17(3):41–48, 2003.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Gopalakrishnan, S., and Damanpour, F., Patterns of generation and adoption of innovation in organizations: Contingency models of innovation attributes. J. Eng. Technol. Manag. 11(2):95–117, 1994.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Damanpour, F., and Gopalakrishnan, S., Theories of organizational structure and innovation adoption: The role of environmental change. J. Eng. Technol. Manag. 15(1):1–24, 1998.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Rogers, E. M., The diffusion of innovations, 5th ed. Free Press, New York, 2003.Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Nidumolu, S. R., and Knotts, G. W., The Effects of customizability and reusability on perceived process and competitive performance of software firms. MIS Quarterly 22(2):105–137, 1998.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Karsh, B.-T., Beasley, J., and Hagenauer, M. E., Are electronic medical records associated with improved perceptions of the quality of medical records, working conditions, or quality of working life? Behav. Inf. Technol. 23(5):327–335, 2004.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Menachemi, N., Perkins, R. M., van Durme, D. J., and Brooks, R. G., Examining the adoption of electronic health records and personal digital assistants by family physicians in Florida. Informatics in Primary Care 14:1–9, 2006.Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Menachemi, N., and Brooks, R. G., Reviewing the benefits and costs of electronic health records and associated patient safety technologies. J. Med. Syst. 30(3):159–168, 2006.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.College of InformationFlorida State UniversityTallahasseeUSA

Personalised recommendations