Usability of an electronic health record 6 months post go-live and its association with burnout, insomnia and turnover intention: a cross-sectional study in a hospital setting.

IF 4.4 Q1 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES BMJ Health & Care Informatics Pub Date : 2025-03-28 DOI:10.1136/bmjhci-2024-101200
Signe Lohmann-Lafrenz, Sigmund Østgård Gismervik, Solveig Osborg Ose, Lene Aasdahl, Hilde Brun Lauritzen, Arild Faxvaag, Ellen Marie Bardal, Eivind Schjelderup Skarpsno
{"title":"Usability of an electronic health record 6 months post go-live and its association with burnout, insomnia and turnover intention: a cross-sectional study in a hospital setting.","authors":"Signe Lohmann-Lafrenz, Sigmund Østgård Gismervik, Solveig Osborg Ose, Lene Aasdahl, Hilde Brun Lauritzen, Arild Faxvaag, Ellen Marie Bardal, Eivind Schjelderup Skarpsno","doi":"10.1136/bmjhci-2024-101200","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>The aim of this study was to assess how different groups of health professionals evaluated the usability of a new electronic health record (EHR) and to investigate the association between the usability and burnout, insomnia and turnover intention.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This cross-sectional study included 1424 health professionals who worked at a Norwegian University Hospital. The usability was measured with the System Usability Scale (SUS) 6 months after the previous electronic record was replaced with a more comprehensive, sector-wide, patient-centred EHR in 2022.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The median SUS score was 25 (IQR 12.5-37.5) out of 100 and ranged from 15 (IQR 7.5-25.0) among medical doctors to 40 (IQR 27.6-55.0) among laboratory technicians. Nurses reported a score of 25 (IQR 12.5-40.0). In clinical contexts, the median SUS score ranged from 15 (IQR 10.0-30.0) within radiology to 27.5 (IQR 15.0-42.5) within internal medicine, whereas laboratory medicine reported a score of 37.5 (IQR 27.5-55.0). In multivariable analyses using health professionals in the highest quarter of the SUS as the reference, those in the lowest quarter were more likely to report burnout (OR 3.05, 95% CI 1.86 to 5.00), insomnia (OR 1.72, 95% CI 1.18 to 2.50) and turnover intention (OR 2.35, 95% CI 1.53 to 3.64).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Most health professionals across all occupational groups and clinical contexts reported low usability of a new EHR 6 months after go-live. Those who reported the lowest usability were more likely to report burnout, insomnia and turnover intention.</p>","PeriodicalId":9050,"journal":{"name":"BMJ Health & Care Informatics","volume":"32 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11956351/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMJ Health & Care Informatics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjhci-2024-101200","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: The aim of this study was to assess how different groups of health professionals evaluated the usability of a new electronic health record (EHR) and to investigate the association between the usability and burnout, insomnia and turnover intention.

Methods: This cross-sectional study included 1424 health professionals who worked at a Norwegian University Hospital. The usability was measured with the System Usability Scale (SUS) 6 months after the previous electronic record was replaced with a more comprehensive, sector-wide, patient-centred EHR in 2022.

Results: The median SUS score was 25 (IQR 12.5-37.5) out of 100 and ranged from 15 (IQR 7.5-25.0) among medical doctors to 40 (IQR 27.6-55.0) among laboratory technicians. Nurses reported a score of 25 (IQR 12.5-40.0). In clinical contexts, the median SUS score ranged from 15 (IQR 10.0-30.0) within radiology to 27.5 (IQR 15.0-42.5) within internal medicine, whereas laboratory medicine reported a score of 37.5 (IQR 27.5-55.0). In multivariable analyses using health professionals in the highest quarter of the SUS as the reference, those in the lowest quarter were more likely to report burnout (OR 3.05, 95% CI 1.86 to 5.00), insomnia (OR 1.72, 95% CI 1.18 to 2.50) and turnover intention (OR 2.35, 95% CI 1.53 to 3.64).

Conclusion: Most health professionals across all occupational groups and clinical contexts reported low usability of a new EHR 6 months after go-live. Those who reported the lowest usability were more likely to report burnout, insomnia and turnover intention.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

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
上线6个月后电子健康记录的可用性及其与倦怠、失眠和离职意向的关系:一项医院环境下的横断面研究
目的:本研究的目的是评估不同群体的卫生专业人员如何评价新的电子健康档案(EHR)的可用性,并探讨可用性与倦怠、失眠和离职倾向的关系。方法:本横断面研究包括在挪威大学医院工作的1424名卫生专业人员。在2022年以前的电子病历被更全面、全部门、以患者为中心的电子病历取代6个月后,用系统可用性量表(SUS)测量了可用性。结果:SUS评分中位数为25分(IQR为12.5-37.5)(满分为100分),内科医生为15分(IQR为7.5-25.0),实验室技术人员为40分(IQR为27.6-55.0)。护士报告得分为25分(IQR 12.5-40.0)。在临床环境中,放射学的SUS评分中位数从15 (IQR 10.0-30.0)到内科的27.5 (IQR 15.0-42.5),而检验医学报告的评分为37.5 (IQR 27.5-55.0)。在多变量分析中,使用SUS最高季度的卫生专业人员作为参考,最低季度的卫生专业人员更有可能报告倦怠(OR 3.05, 95% CI 1.86至5.00)、失眠(OR 1.72, 95% CI 1.18至2.50)和离职意向(OR 2.35, 95% CI 1.53至3.64)。结论:所有职业群体和临床背景的大多数卫生专业人员报告,新的电子病历在投入使用6个月后可用性较低。那些报告可用性最低的人更有可能报告倦怠、失眠和离职倾向。
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
CiteScore
6.10
自引率
4.90%
发文量
40
审稿时长
18 weeks
期刊最新文献
Traversing the data landscape: insights and recommendations from a case study using novel linkage of care home and health data. Online survey assessing US primary care physicians' attitudes toward AI use in clinical administrative tasks. Data-driven queueing modelling: a simulation case study of emergency department crowding. Consolidation of health data to improve health data governance using the Multi-Source Data Analytics and Triangulation platform. User-centred prototyping solutions to solve adult critical care issues: a scoping review.
×
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:604180095
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