Journal of Medical Systems

, Volume 36, Issue 5, pp 3273–3281 | Cite as

Analysis of the EHR Systems in Spanish Primary Public Health System: The Lack of Interoperability

  • Isabel de la TorreEmail author
  • Sandra González
  • Miguel López-Coronado
Original Paper


This paper presents the impact of the Electronic Health Records (EHRs) systems jointly in the Spanish Primary Public Health System. Different EHRs that exist in each of the Spanish regions are discussed. Moreover, other purpose of this analysis is to identify the current state of knowledge about health information systems adoption in primary care in Spain. For the analysis and study of EHRs systems in Spain we have relied on the use of different sources, mostly items related to the study of EHRs systems in different areas. We will analyze some technical aspects of these and some of their major implications, both positive and negative. Moreover, we have resorted to make direct contact with the organizations that have implemented the EHRs systems. The result of this study leads to a main idea, the need for interoperability between different systems. We will delve into how we have reached this conclusion and that is the key to EHRs systems homogenization of Spanish territory. EHR systems used in different regions of Spain offer the access to medical information as well as provide a clinical analysis of each patient more quickly. The adoption of health information systems is seen world wide as one method to mitigate the widening health care demand and supply gap.


Electronic Health Record (EHR) Interoperability Primary public health system Standards 



The authors wish to express our gratitude to the organizations that have implemented the EHRs systems in Spain by answering our questions.


  1. 1.
    Hovenga, E., Garde, S., and Heard, S., Nursing constraint models for electronic health records: A vision for domain knowledge governance. Int. J. Med. Inform. 75:886–898, 2005.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Hackl, W., Hoerbst, A., and Ammenwerth, E., EHR Acceptance among Physicians in Private Practice in Austria: A Qualitative Study. Methods Inf. Med. 50:53–61, 2011.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Hoerbst, A., et al., Attitudes and behaviors related to the introduction of electronic health records among Austrian and German citizens. Int. J. Med. Inform. 79:81–89, 2010.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Ludwick, D. A., and Doucette, J., Adopting electronic medical records in primary care: Lessons learned from health information systems implementation experience in seven countries. Int. J. Med. Inform. 78:22–31, 2008.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Staroselsky, M., Improving electronic health record (EHR) accuracy and increasing compliance with health maintenance clinical guidelines through patient access and input. Int. J. Med. Inform. 75:693–700, 2006.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
  7. 7.
  8. 8.
  9. 9.
    SGP System. Retrieved September 24, 2011, from
  10. 10.
    Jara System. Retrieved September 24, 2011, from
  11. 11.
  12. 12.
    IANUS System. Retrieved September 24, 2011, from
  13. 13.
    ABUCASIS System. Retrieved September 24, 2011, from
  14. 14.
    SELENE System. Retrieved September 25, 2011, from
  15. 15.
    EDESIS System. Retrieved September 26, 2011, from
  16. 16.
    HCI System. Retrieved September 25, 2011, from
  17. 17.
    AP-Madrid System. Retrieved September 25, 2011, from
  18. 18.
  19. 19.
    OSABIDE System. Retrieved September 22, 2011, from
  20. 20.
    HCEC System. Retrieved September 23, 2011, from
  21. 21.
    SELENE AP System. Retrieved September 24, 2011, from
  22. 22.
    e-SIAP System. Retrieved September 28, 2011, from
  23. 23.
    Häyrinen, K., Saranto, K., and Nykänen, P., Definition, structure, content, use and impacts of electronic health records: A review of the research literature. Int. J. Med. Inform. 77:291–304, 2008.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Perera, G., Holbrook, A., Thabane, L., Foster, G., and Willison, D. J., Views on health information sharing and privacy from primary care practices using electronic medical records. Int. J. Med. Inform. 80:94–101, 2011.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Pal, E. T., Nilsson, G. H., and Furhoff, A. K., Clinical effect of computer generated physician reminders in health screening in primary health care—a controlled clinical trial of preventive services among the elderly. Int. J. Med. Inform. 73:695–703, 2004.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Protti, D., Johansen, I., and Pérez-Torres, F., Comparing the application of Health Information Technology in primary care in Denmark and Andalucía, Spain. Int. J. Med. Inform. 78:270–283, 2009.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Staroselsky, M., et al., An effort to improve electronic health record medication list accuracy between visits: Patients’ and physicians’ response. Int. J. Med. Inform. 77:153–160, 2007.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Nowinski, C., et al., The impact of converting to an electronic health record on organizational culture and quality improvement. Int. J. Med. Inform. 76:174–183, 2007.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Isabel de la Torre
    • 1
    Email author
  • Sandra González
    • 1
  • Miguel López-Coronado
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Signal Theory and CommunicationsUniversity of ValladolidValladolidSpain

Personalised recommendations