Skip to main content
Log in

Family Physicians’ Perceptions and Use of Electronic Clinical Decision Support During the First Year of Implementation

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Journal of Medical Systems Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

An electronic decision support system (the EBMeDS system) was integrated in one of the Electronic Medical Records (EMR) of Belgian family physicians (Feb 2010). User acceptance of the system is considered as a necessary condition for the effective implementation of any IT project. Facilitators, barriers and issues of non-acceptance need to be understood in view of a successful implementation and to minimize unexpected adoption behavior. Objectives of the study were the assessment of users’ perceptions towards the recently implemented EBMeDS system, the investigation of user-interactions with the system and possible relationships between perceptions and use. A mixed evaluation approach was performed consisting of a qualitative and a quantitative analysis. The technology acceptance model of UTAUT was used as a structural model for the development of our questionnaire to identify factors that may account for acceptance and use of the EBMeDS system (seven-point Likert scales). A quantitative analysis of computer-recorded user interactions with the system was performed for an evaluation period of 3 months to assess the actual use of the system. Qualitative and quantitative analysis were linked to each other. Thirty-nine family physicians (12 %) completed the survey. The majority of respondents (66 %) had a positive attitude towards the system in general. Mean intention to keep using the system was high (5,91 ± 1,33). Their perception of the ease of use of the system (mean 5,04 ± 1,41), usefulness (mean 4,69 ± 1,35) and facilitating conditions (4,43 ± 1,13) was in general positive. Only 0,35 % of reminders were requested on demand, the other 99,62 % of reminders displayed automatically. Detailed guidelines (long) were requested for 0,47 % of reminders automatically shown versus 16,17 % of reminders on request. The script behind the reminders was requested for 8,4 % of reminders automatically shown versus 13,6 % of reminders on request. The majority of respondents demonstrated a relatively high degree of acceptance towards the EBMeDS system. Although the majority of respondents was in general positive towards the ease of use of the system, usefulness and facilitating conditions, part of the statements gave rather mixed results and could be identified as important points of interest for future implementation initiatives and system improvements. It has to be stressed that our population consisted of a convenience sample of early adopters, willing to answer a questionnaire. The willingness to adopt the system depends on the willingness to use ICPC coding. As such, the quality of reminding partly depends on the quality of coding. There is a need to reach a larger population of physicians (including physicians who never used the system or stopped using the system) to validate the results of this survey.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Garg, A. X., Adhikari, N. K., McDonald, H., et al., Effects of computerized clinical decision support systems on practitioner performance and patient outcomes: A systematic review. JAMA 293:1223–1238, 2005.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Eccles, M., and Grimshaw, J., Selecting, presenting and delivering clinical guidelines: Are there any “magic bullets”? Med. J. Aust. 180(Suppl 6):S52–S54, 2004.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Johnston, M. E., Langton, K. B., Haynes, R. B., and Mathieu, A., Effects of computer-based clinical decision support systems on clinician performance and patient outcome. A critical appraisal of research. Ann. Intern. Med. 120:136–142, 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Shea, S., DuMouchel, W., and Bahamonde, L., A meta-analysis of 16 randomized controlled trials to evaluate computer-based clinical reminder systems for preventive care in the ambulatory setting. JAMIA 3:399–409, 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Heselmans, A., Van de Velde, S., Donceel, P., Aertgeerts, B., and Ramaekers, D., Effectiveness of electronic guideline-based implementation systems in ambulatory care settings—a systematic review. Implement. Sci. 4:82, 2009.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Shojania, K. G., Jennings, A., Mayhew, A., Ramsay, C., Eccles, M., and Grimshaw, J., Effect of point-of-care computer reminders on physician behaviour: A systematic review. CMAJ 182:E216–E225, 2010.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Venkatesh, V., Morris, M., and Davis, G., User acceptance of information technology: toward a unified view. MIS Quart. 27:425–478, 2003.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Wills, M. J., El-Gayar, O. F., and Bennett, D., Examining healthcare professionals’ acceptance of electronic medical records using UTAUT. Issues in Information Systems 9:396–401, 2008.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Schaper, L., and Pervan, G., A model of information and communication technology acceptance and utilisation by occupational therapists. Stud. Health Technol. Inform. 130:91–101, 2007.

    Google Scholar 

  10. EBMeDS : Context-Sensitive Guidance At the Point of Care. http://www.ebmeds.org. Accessed 13 November 2011

  11. Varonen, H., Kortteisto, T., and Kaila, M., What may help or hinder the implementation of computerized decision support systems (CDSSs): A focus group study with physicians. Fam. Pract. 25:162–167, 2008.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Rousseau, N., McColl, E., Newton, J., Grimshaw, J., and Eccles, M., Practice based, longitudinal, qualitative interview study of computerised evidence based guidelines in primary care. BMJ 326:314, 2003.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Bates, D. W., Kuperman, G. J., Wang, S., et al., Ten commandments for effective clinical decision support: Making the practice of evidence-based medicine a reality. J. Am. Med. Inform. Assoc. 10:523–530, 2003.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Trivedi, M. H., Daly, E. J., Kern, J. K., Grannemann, B. D., Sunderajan, P., and Claassen, C. A., Barriers to implementation of a computerized decision support system for depression: An observational report on lessons learned in “real world” clinical settings. BMC Med. Inform. Decis. Mak. 9:6, 2009.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Ahearn, M. D., and Kerr, S. J., General practitioners’ perceptions of the pharmaceutical decision-support tools in their prescribing software. Med. J. Aust. 179:34–37, 2003.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Vaziri, A., Connor, E., Shepherd, I., Jones, R. T., Chan, T., and de Lusignan, S., Are we setting about improving the safety of computerised prescribing in the right way? Inform. Prim. Care 17:175–182, 2009.

    Google Scholar 

  17. van der Sijs, H., Aarts, J., Vulto, A., and Berg, M., Overriding of drug safety alerts in computerized physician order entry. J. Am. Med. Inform. Assoc. 13:138–147, 2006.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgment

We would like to thank all the family physicians who took part in this study and are grateful to all experts of SoSoeMe who created the possibilities to perform the study.

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Annemie Heselmans.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Heselmans, A., Aertgeerts, B., Donceel, P. et al. Family Physicians’ Perceptions and Use of Electronic Clinical Decision Support During the First Year of Implementation. J Med Syst 36, 3677–3684 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10916-012-9841-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10916-012-9841-3

Keywords

Navigation