Download pdf
Challenge of electronic health record interface: literature review
- 1 University of Michigan
* Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Abstract
Electronic Health Record (EHR) differences from the traditional patient medical history in which everything related to the patients’ past visits and records such as family history or lab results are being stored electronically. This system is supposed to innovate the world of healthcare into the next step as it intends to provide different advantages such as ensure transparency cross different medical institute and enhance quality of care. However, due to the lack of different aspects, there are some major flaws with HER. This literature review explores the challenges of EHR interface design and its impact on healthcare providers across various medical settings. The paper demonstrates through research that the significant effects of EHR usability on provider efficiency and error rates, highlighting a notable disconnect between the design of these systems and the practical needs of their users. In addition, the review reveals a critical need for user-centered EHR interfaces, emphasizing the importance of collaborative efforts among clinicians, developers, and healthcare organizations. Based on a synthesizes findings from diverse studies, this paper advocate for EHR systems that are not only technically proficient but also intuitively aligned with healthcare providers' workflows, ultimately aiming to enhance clinical outcomes and operational efficiency.
Keywords
Electronic Health Record, Design Challenges, User-Centered Design, Clinical Outcomes, Provider Efficiency.
[1]. Menachemi, N., & Collum, T. H. (2011). Benefits and drawbacks of Electronic Health Record Systems. Risk Management and Healthcare Policy, 47–55. https://doi.org/10.2147/rmhp.s12985
[2]. Ahmed, A., Chandra, S., Herasevich, V., Gajic, O., & Pickering, B. W. (2011). The effect of two different electronic health record user interfaces on intensive care provider task load, errors of cognition, and performance*. Critical Care Medicine, 39(7), 1626–1634. https://doi.org/10.1097/ccm.0b013e31821858a0
[3]. Orfanidis L, Bamidis PD, Eaglestone B. Data Quality Issues in Electronic Health Records: An Adaptation Framework for the Greek Health System. Health Informatics Journal. 2004;10(1):23-36. doi:10.1177/1460458204040665
[4]. Edwards, P. J., Moloney, K. P., Jacko, J. A., & Sainfort, F. (2008). Evaluating usability of a commercial electronic health record: A case study. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 66(10), 718–728. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhcs.2008.06.002
[5]. Abramson, E. L., Patel, V., Malhotra, S., Pfoh, E. R., Nena Osorio, S., Cheriff, A., Cole, C. L., Bunce, A., Ash, J., & Kaushal, R. (2012). Physician experiences transitioning between an older versus newer electronic health record for electronic prescribing. International Journal of Medical Informatics, 81(8), 539–548. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2012.02.010
[6]. Bowman S. (2013). Impact of electronic health record systems on information integrity: quality and safety implications. Perspectives in health information management, 10(Fall), 1c.
[7]. Cifuentes, M., Davis, M., Fernald, D., Gunn, R., Dickinson, P., & Cohen, D. J. (2015). Electronic health record challenges, workarounds, and solutions observed in practices integrating behavioral health and primary care. The Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine, 28(Supplement 1). https://doi.org/10.3122/jabfm.2015.s1.150133
[8]. Calman, N., Hauser, D., Lurio, J., Wu, W. Y., & Pichardo, M. (2012). Strengthening Public Health and primary care collaboration through Electronic Health Records. American Journal of Public Health, 102(11). https://doi.org/10.2105/ajph.2012.301000
[9]. Kruse, C. S., Kristof, C., Jones, B., Mitchell, E., & Martinez, A. (2016). Barriers to electronic health record adoption: A systematic literature review. Journal of Medical Systems, 40(12). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10916-016-0628-9
Cite this article
He,J. (2024). Challenge of electronic health record interface: literature review. Theoretical and Natural Science,60,25-31.
Data availability
The datasets used and/or analyzed during the current study will be available from the authors upon reasonable request.
Disclaimer/Publisher's Note
The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of EWA Publishing and/or the editor(s). EWA Publishing and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.
About volume
Volume title: Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Biological Engineering and Medical Science
© 2024 by the author(s). Licensee EWA Publishing, Oxford, UK. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and
conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license. Authors who
publish this series agree to the following terms:
1. Authors retain copyright and grant the series right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons
Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgment of the work's authorship and initial publication in this
series.
2. Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the series's published
version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgment of its initial
publication in this series.
3. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and
during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See
Open access policy for details).