IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/thssxx/v4y2015i1p64-81.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Acceptance and use of electronic medical records: An exploratory study of hospital physicians’ salient beliefs about HIT systems

Author

Listed:
  • Andy Weeger
  • Heiko Gewald

Abstract

If a hospital keeps electronic medical records (EMRs), the underlying health information system is the primary repository and source of patient-related data for hospital physicians. Even though the benefits and improvements attained through health information technology (HIT) are widely acknowledged, EMR adoption rates are surprisingly low in German hospitals. Since there is no ‘pull’ to use EMR systems, we theorize that low penetration of EMR systems could be in part explained by physicians’ antipathy towards computerized medical records. In order to examine physicians’ salient beliefs about EMRs and EMR usage and to identify the processes that form them, we conducted a multi-case study in German hospitals, drawing on concepts from Social Cognitive Theory and the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT) to elicit beliefs and structure our analysis. This study sheds light on different types of beliefs and the belief-forming process and their impact on HIT acceptance and use. Our findings indicate that HIT acceptance and use is not solely impacted by cognitive behavioural and environmental factors, as proposed by UTAUT, but also by personal factors such as self-efficacy and emotions. Furthermore, our study provides evidence of continuous reciprocal causation across behavioural, personal and environmental beliefs. The findings indicate that existing technology acceptance models need to be modified for the specific health-care context by adapting the range, meaning and scope of constructs.

Suggested Citation

  • Andy Weeger & Heiko Gewald, 2015. "Acceptance and use of electronic medical records: An exploratory study of hospital physicians’ salient beliefs about HIT systems," Health Systems, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 4(1), pages 64-81, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:taf:thssxx:v:4:y:2015:i:1:p:64-81
    DOI: 10.1057/hs.2014.11
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1057/hs.2014.11
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1057/hs.2014.11?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:thssxx:v:4:y:2015:i:1:p:64-81. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/thss .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.