Citizen Views on an Opt-Out Approach to National Electronic Health Records in Germany: A Small-Scale Qualitative Study.

IF 2.6 3区 医学 Q2 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH International Journal of Public Health Pub Date : 2024-07-03 eCollection Date: 2024-01-01 DOI:10.3389/ijph.2024.1607288
Kimon Papadopoulos, Verena Struckmann, Viktor von Wyl, Felix Gille
{"title":"Citizen Views on an Opt-Out Approach to National Electronic Health Records in Germany: A Small-Scale Qualitative Study.","authors":"Kimon Papadopoulos, Verena Struckmann, Viktor von Wyl, Felix Gille","doi":"10.3389/ijph.2024.1607288","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Electronic health records (German: elektronische Patientenakte - ePA) are an important healthcare tool. However, in Germany, current participation remains low for their national ePA. To rectify this, the German government recently adopted an opt-out approach to their national ePA system. The objective of this study is to investigate and provide a brief overview of German public attitudes towards this approach to inform policymakers with evidence-based insights.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Four public focus groups were conducted with 12 German citizens to discuss their opinions on the German governments new opt-out approach to the ePA.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Three major thematic categories were identified (Contributors to Opt-Out Implementation, Barriers to Opt-Out Implementation, and Contingent Factors) to describe citizen views on the opt-out approach for the ePA.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The public is generally supportive of an opt-out approach to ePAs in Germany, as they see the benefits ePAs can provide to German society; but they are skeptical on how successful this approach might be due to extant issues that policymakers must be aware of in order to successfully implement an opt-out approach for Germany's national ePA system.</p>","PeriodicalId":14322,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Public Health","volume":"69 ","pages":"1607288"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11251894/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Public Health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3389/ijph.2024.1607288","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: Electronic health records (German: elektronische Patientenakte - ePA) are an important healthcare tool. However, in Germany, current participation remains low for their national ePA. To rectify this, the German government recently adopted an opt-out approach to their national ePA system. The objective of this study is to investigate and provide a brief overview of German public attitudes towards this approach to inform policymakers with evidence-based insights.

Methods: Four public focus groups were conducted with 12 German citizens to discuss their opinions on the German governments new opt-out approach to the ePA.

Results: Three major thematic categories were identified (Contributors to Opt-Out Implementation, Barriers to Opt-Out Implementation, and Contingent Factors) to describe citizen views on the opt-out approach for the ePA.

Conclusion: The public is generally supportive of an opt-out approach to ePAs in Germany, as they see the benefits ePAs can provide to German society; but they are skeptical on how successful this approach might be due to extant issues that policymakers must be aware of in order to successfully implement an opt-out approach for Germany's national ePA system.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
德国公民对国家电子健康记录选择退出方法的看法:小规模定性研究。
目的:电子健康记录(德语:elektronische Patientenakte - ePA)是一种重要的医疗保健工具。然而,在德国,目前参与国家电子病历系统的人数仍然很少。为了改变这种状况,德国政府最近在其国家电子病历系统中采用了选择退出的方法。本研究的目的是调查并简要概述德国公众对这一方法的态度,从而为政策制定者提供基于证据的见解:方法:对 12 名德国公民进行了四次公众焦点小组讨论,以讨论他们对德国政府新的 ePA "选择退出 "方法的看法:结果:确定了三大主题类别(选择退出实施的促进因素、选择退出实施的障碍和权变因素),以描述公民对 ePA 选择退出方法的看法:结论:公众普遍支持在德国采用 "选择退出 "的方式,因为他们看到了 ePA 能为德国社会带来的好处;但他们对这种方式的成功程度持怀疑态度,因为决策者必须意识到一些现存问题,以便在德国的国家 ePA 系统中成功实施 "选择退出 "方式。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
International Journal of Public Health
International Journal of Public Health 医学-公共卫生、环境卫生与职业卫生
CiteScore
4.20
自引率
2.20%
发文量
269
审稿时长
12 months
期刊介绍: The International Journal of Public Health publishes scientific articles relevant to global public health, from different countries and cultures, and assembles them into issues that raise awareness and understanding of public health problems and solutions. The Journal welcomes submissions of original research, critical and relevant reviews, methodological papers and manuscripts that emphasize theoretical content. IJPH sometimes publishes commentaries and opinions. Special issues highlight key areas of current research. The Editorial Board''s mission is to provide a thoughtful forum for contemporary issues and challenges in global public health research and practice.
期刊最新文献
Socioeconomic Inequalities in Out-of-Pocket and Catastrophic Health Expenditures in Pakistan. Corrigendum: Developing Core Indicators for Evaluating Second Victim Programs: An International Consensus Approach. Energy Drink Consumption Among Physically Active Polish Adolescents: Gender and Age-Specific Public Health Issue. Relationship Between the Online Health Information Search and Vaccination Behavior During the COVID-19 Pandemic. Psychological Safety and Work Design as Mediators of Supervisors' Dark Triad Traits Impact on Nurses' Task Performance.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1