Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The STEP trials

A round-up of the STEP phase 3 clinical trials evaluating semaglutide for weight loss in people with overweight or obesity.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making
Published in: BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making 1/2021

Open Access 01-12-2021 | Research

Users’ perception on factors contributing to electronic medical records systems use: a focus group discussion study in healthcare facilities setting in Kenya

Authors: Philomena N. Ngugi, Martin C. Were, Ankica Babic

Published in: BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making | Issue 1/2021

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Electronic medical records systems (EMRs) adoption in healthcare to facilitate work processes have become common in many countries. Although EMRs are associated with quality patient care, patient safety, and cost reduction, their adoption rates are comparatively low. Understanding factors associated with the use of the implemented EMRs are critical for advancing successful implementations and scale-up sustainable initiatives. The aim of this study was to explore end users’ perceptions and experiences on factors facilitating and hindering EMRs use in healthcare facilities in Kenya, a low- and middle-income country.

Methods

Two focus group discussions were conducted with EMRs users (n = 20) each representing a healthcare facility determined by the performance of the EMRs implementation. Content analysis was performed on the transcribed data and relevant themes derived.

Results

Six thematic categories for both facilitators and barriers emerged, and these related to (1) system functionalities; (2) training; (3) technical support; (4) human factors; (5) infrastructure, and (6) EMRs operation mode. The identified facilitators included: easiness of use and learning of the system complemented by EMRs upgrades, efficiency of EMRs in patient data management, responsive information technology (IT) and collegial support, and user training. The identified barriers included: frequent power blackouts, inadequate computers, retrospective data entry EMRs operation mode, lack of continuous training on system upgrades, and delayed IT support.

Conclusions

Users generally believed that the EMRs improved the work process, with multiple factors identified as facilitators and barriers to their use. Most users perceived system functionalities and training as motivators to EMRs use, while infrastructural issues posed as the greatest barrier. No specific EMRs use facilitators and/or barriers could be attributed to facility performance levels. Continuous evaluations are necessary to assess improvements of the identified factors as well as determine emerging issues.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
Chisolm DJ, Purnell TS, Cohen DM, McAlearney AS. Clinician perceptions of an electronic medical record during the first year of implementaton in emergency services. Pediatr Emerg Care. 2010;26(2):107–10.PubMedPubMedCentral
2.
Tilahun B, Fritz F. Comprehensive evaluation of electronic medical record system use and user satisfaction at five low-resource setting hospitals in Ethiopia. JMIR Med Inform. 2015;3:2.
3.
Samia Z, Sayeeda A. Evaluation of EMR implementation in a private hospital from user’s perspective. Int J Nurs Health care. 2013;1(1):143–7.
4.
International Organization for Standardization ISO/DTR 20514, health informatics—electronic health record—definition, scope, and context, vol. SO/TR 2051. 2005.
5.
Odekunle FF, Odekunle RO, Shankar S. Why sub-Saharan Africa lags in electronic health record adoption and possible strategies to increase its adoption in this region. Int J Health Sci (Qassim). 2017;11(4):59–64.
6.
Adler-Milstein J, Holmgren AJ, Kralovec P, Worzala C, Searcy T, Patel V. Electronic health record adoption in US hospitals: the emergence of a digital “advanced use” divide. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2017;24(6):1142–8.PubMedPubMedCentral
7.
Pearce C. Electronic medical records—where to from here? Aust Fam Phys. 2009;38(7):537–9.
8.
Care P, Offices P, Protti D, Bowden T, Zealand N. Issues in international health policy electronic medical record adoption in New Zealand. Commonw Fund. 2010;96(1434):1–14.
9.
Ngugi P, Were MC, Babic A. Facilitators and barriers of electronic medical records systems implementation in low resource settings: a holistic view. Stud Heal Technol Inform. 2018;251:187–90.
10.
Jawhari B, Keenan L, Zakus D, Ludwick D, Isaac A, Saleh A, et al. Barriers and facilitators to electronic medical record (EMR) use in an urban slum. Int J Med Inform. 2016;94:246–54.PubMed
11.
12.
Sheykhotayefeh M, Safdari R, Ghazisaeedi M, Mohammadzadeh N, Khademi SH, Torabi V, et al. Hospital information systems implementation: an evaluation of critical success factors in Northeast of Iran. Glob J Health Sci. 2016;9(2):93–101.
13.
Pole D. Electronic patient records in Sri Lankan hospitals. Sri Lanka J Bio-Med Inform. 2010;1(1):43.
14.
Yusof MM, Paul RJ, Stergioulas LK. Towards a framework for health information systems evaluation. In: Proceedings of the 39th annual Hawaii international conference on system sciences (HICSS’06). 2006. p. 1–10.
15.
Zviran M, Erlich Z. Measuring IS user satisfaction: review and implications. Commun Assoc Inf Syst. 2003;12(12):81–103.
16.
Mardiana S, Tjakraatmadja JH, Aprianingsih A. How organizational culture affects information system success : the case of an Indonesia IT-based company. J Inf Syst Eng Bus Intell. 2018;4(2):84–95.
17.
Moody LE, Slocumb E, Berg B, Jackson D. Electronic health records documentation in nursing: nurses’ perceptions, attitudes, and preferences. CIN Comput Inform Nurs. 2004;22(6):337–44.PubMed
18.
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(4):419–24.PubMed
19.
Yi M. Major issues in adoption of electronic health records. J Digit Inf Manag. 2018;16(4):180.
20.
Al-Adwan AS, Berger H. Exploring physicians’ behavioural intention toward the adoption of electronic health records: an empirical study from Jordan. Int J Healthc Technol Manag. 2015;15(2):89–111.
21.
Kruse CS, Mileski M, Alaytsev V, Carol E, Williams A. Adoption factors associated with electronic health record among longterm care facilities: a systematic review. BMJ Open. 2015;5:1.
22.
Hillestad R, Bigelow J, Bower A, Girosi F, Meili R, Scoville R, et al. Can electronic medical record systems transform health care? Potential health benefits, savings, and costs. Health Aff. 2005;24(5):1103–17.
23.
McGinn CA, Grenier S, Duplantie J, Shaw N, Sicotte C, Mathieu L, et al. Comparison of user groups’ perspectives of barriers and facilitators to implementing electronic health records: a systematic review. BMC Med. 2011;9:46.PubMedPubMedCentral
24.
Landis-Lewis Z, Manjomo R, Gadabu OJ, Kam M, Simwaka BN, Zickmund SL, et al. Barriers to using eHealth data for clinical performance feedback in Malawi: a case study HHS Public Access. Int J Med Inf. 2015;84(10):868–75.
25.
Farzianpour F, Amirian S, Byravan R. An investigation on the barriers and facilitators of the implementation of electronic health records (EHR). Health. 2015;7:1665–70.
26.
Khalifa M. Barriers to health information systems and electronic medical records implementation a field study of Saudi Arabian hospitals. Procedia Comput Sci. 2013;21:335–42.
27.
Jawhari B, Ludwick D, Keenan L, Zakus D, Hayward R. Benefits and challenges of EMR implementations in low resource settings: a state-of-the-art review. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2016;16(1):1–12.
28.
Akanbi MO, Ocheke AN, Agaba PA, Daniyam CA, Agaba EI, Okeke EN, et al. Use of electronic health records in sub-Saharan Africa: progress and challenges. J Med Trop. 2012;14(1):1–6.PubMedPubMedCentral
29.
Holden RJ. What stands in the way of technology-mediated patient safety improvements ? A study of facilitators and barriers to physicians ’ use of electronic health records. J Patient Saf. 2011;7(4):193–203.PubMedPubMedCentral
30.
Ngugi P, Babic A, Were MC. A multivariate statistical evaluation of actual use of electronic health record systems implementations in Kenya. PLoS ONE. 2021;16:9.
31.
32.
Muga R, Kizito P, Mbayah M, Gakuruh T. Overview of the health system in Kenya. In: Kenya Service Provision Assessment Survey 2004. National Government Publication, p. 13–24.
33.
Ministry of Health. Strategic Plan of Kenya Taking the Kenya Essential Package for Health to the Community. 2006.
34.
Kang’a S, Puttkammer N, Wanyee S, Kimanga D, Madrano J, Muthee V, et al. A national standards-based assessment on functionality of electronic medical records systems used in Kenyan public-Sector health facilities. Int J Med Inform. 2017;97:68–75.PubMed
35.
Muinga N, Magare S, Monda J, Kamau O, Houston S, Fraser H, et al. Implementing an open source electronic health record system in kenyan health care facilities: case study. J Med Internet Res. 2018;20(4):1–23.
36.
Ngugi PN, Gesicho MB, Babic A, Were MC. Assessment of HIV data reporting performance by facilities during EMR systems implementations in Kenya. Stud Health Technol Inform. 2020;272:167–70.PubMed
37.
Ngugi PN, Babic A, Kariuki J, Santas X, Naanyu V, Were M. Development of standard indicators to assess use of electronic health record systems implemented in low- and medium-income countries. PLoS ONE. 2021;16:1.
38.
Palinkas LA, Horwitz SM, Green CA, Wisdom JP, Duan N, Hoagwood K, et al. Purposeful sampling for qualitative data collection and analysis in mixed method implementation research. Adm Policy Ment Health. 2016;42(5):533–44.
39.
Fugard AJB, Potts HWW. Supporting thinking on sample sizes for thematic analyses: a quantitative tool. Int J Soc Res Methodol. 2015;18(6):669–84.
40.
Braun V, Clarke V. Successful qualitative research: a practical guide for beginners. 1st ed. London: Sage; 2013.
41.
42.
Mohammed-Rajput NA, Smith DC, Mamlin B, Biondich P, Doebbeling BN, Open CI. OpenMRS, a global medical records system collaborative: factors influencing successful implementation. In: AMIA annual symposium proceedings. 2011. p. 960–8.
43.
44.
45.
46.
Hennink MM. Assessing focus group research. In: Understanding focus group discussions. Oxford University Press. 2014. p. 171–98.
47.
48.
Reiser SL, Randazzo RK, Hughto JMW, Peitzmeier S, DuBois LZ, Pardee DJ, et al. Sentisitive health topics with underserved patient populations: methodological considerations for online focus group discussions. Qual Heal Res. 2018;28(10):1658–73.
49.
Wong L. Focus group discussion: a tool for health and medical research. Singapore Med J. 2008;49(3):256–61.PubMed
50.
O.Nyumba T, Wilson K, Derrick CJ, Mukherjee N. The use of focus group discussion methodology: insights from two decades of application in conservation. Methods Ecol Evol. 2018;9(1):20–32.
51.
Fern EF. The use of focus groups for idea generation: the effects of group size, acquaintanceship, and moderator on response quantity and quality. J Mark Res. 1982;19(1):1–13.
52.
Masadeh MA. Focus group: reviews and practices. Int J Appl Sci Technol. 2012;2(10):63–8.
53.
Dixon-Woods M, Agarwal S, Jones D, Young B, Sutton A. Synthesising qualitative and quantitative evidence: a review of possible methods. J Heal Serv Res Policy. 2005;10(1):45–53.
54.
Krippendorff K. Content analysis. In: Barnouw E, Gerbner G, Schramm W, Worth TL, Gross L, editors. International encyclopedia of communication. New York: Oxford University Press; 1989. p. 403–7.
55.
Braun V, Clarke V, Braun V, Clarke V. Applied qualitative research in psychology. Appl Qual Res Psychol. 2006;3(2):77–101.
56.
57.
Booth A, Hannes K, Harden A, Noyes J, Harris J, Tong A, et al. COREQ (Consolidated Criteria for Reporting Qualitative Studies). In: Moher D, Altman DG, Schulz KF, Simera I, Wager E, editors., et al., Guidelines for reporting health research: a user’s manual. 1st ed. New York: Wiley; 2014. p. 214–26.
58.
Lincoln YS, Guba EG. Paradigmatic controversies, contradictions and emerging confluences. In: The sage handbook of qualitative research. 2005. p. 163–87.
59.
Creswell JW, Miller DL. Determining validity in qualitative inquiry, theory into practice. Theory Pract. 2000;39(3):124–30.
60.
Pope C, Mays N. Reaching the parts other methods cannot reach: an introduction to qualitative methods in health and health services research. BMJ. 1995;311:42–5.PubMedPubMedCentral
61.
Muthee V, Bochner AF, Osterman A, Liku N, Akhwale W, Kwach J, et al. The impact of routine data quality assessments on electronic medical record data quality in Kenya. PLoS ONE. 2018;13:4.
62.
Jha AK, DesRoches CM, Campbell EG, Donelan K, Rao SR, Ferris TG, et al. Use of electronic health records in U.S. hospitals. N Engl J Med. 2009;360(16):1628–38.PubMed
63.
Boonstra A, Broekhuis M. Barriers to the acceptance of electronic medical records by physicians from systematic review to taxonomy and interventions. BMC Health Serv Res. 2010;10:231.PubMedPubMedCentral
64.
Syzdykova A, Malta A, Zolfo M, Diro E, Oliveira JL. Open-source electronic health record systems for low-resource settings: systematic review. JMIR Med Inform. 2017;5:44.
65.
Hannan TJ, Rotich JK, Odero WW, Menya D, Esamai F, Einterz RM, et al. The Mosoriot medical record system: design and initial implementation of an outpatient electronic record system in rural Kenya. Int J Med Inform. 2000;60(1):21–8.PubMed
66.
Hannan TJ, Tierney WM, Rotich JK, Odero WW, Smith F, Mamlin JJ, et al. The Mosoriot medical records system (MMRS) phase I to phase II implementation: an outpatient computer-based medical record system in rural Kenya. AMIA. 2001. p. 619–22.
67.
Tierney WM, Rotich JK, Smith FE, Bii J, Einterz RM, Hannan TJ. Crossing the “digital divide:” implementing an electronic medical record system in a rural Kenyan health center to support clinical care and research. In: Proceedings of AMIA symposium. 2002. p. 792–5.
68.
Ismail A, Jamil AT, Rahman AF, Abu Bakar JM, Mohd Saad N, Saadi H. The implementation of Hospital Information System (HIS) in tertiary hospitals in Malaysia. Malaysian J Public Heal Med. 2010;10(2):16–24.
69.
Pope C, Van Royen P, Baker R. Qualitative methods in research on healthcare quality. Qual Saf Heal Care. 2002;11(2):148–52.
70.
Green J, Thorogood N. Qualitative methods for health research. London: Sage Publications Ltd; 2009.
Metadata
Title
Users’ perception on factors contributing to electronic medical records systems use: a focus group discussion study in healthcare facilities setting in Kenya
Authors
Philomena N. Ngugi
Martin C. Were
Ankica Babic
Publication date
01-12-2021
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making / Issue 1/2021
Electronic ISSN: 1472-6947
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12911-021-01737-x

Other articles of this Issue 1/2021

BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making 1/2021 Go to the issue

Correction

Correction to: A clinical trials corpus annotated with UMLS entities to enhance the access to evidence‑based medicine

Research article

Are health websites credible enough for elderly self-education in the most prevalent elderly diseases?

Research article

Factors of quality of care and their association with smartphone based PHR adoption in South Korean hospitals

Research article

What factors predict physicians' utilization behavior of contrast-enhanced ultrasound? Evidence from the integration of the Theory of Planned Behavior and Technology Acceptance Model using a structural equation modeling approach

Research

Mobile applications for road traffic health and safety in the mirror of the Haddon’s matrix

Research

On the predictability of postoperative complications for cancer patients: a Portuguese cohort study