Factors that promote or inhibit the implementation of e-health systems: An explanatory systematic review

Professor Carl May; Dr Tracy Finch

Factors that promote or inhibit the implementation of e-health systems: An explanatory systematic review Lookup NU author(s) Professor Carl May Dr Tracy Finch



Author(s)		Mair F, May C, O'Donnell C, Finch T, Sullivan F, Murray E
Publication type		Article
Journal		Bulletin World Health Organisation
Year		2012
Volume		90
Issue		5
Pages		357-364
ISSN (print)		0042-9686
ISSN (electronic)		1564-0604



Full text for this publication is not currently held within this repository. Alternative links are provided below where available.




Objective To systematically review the literature on the implementation of e-health to identify: (i) barriers and facilitators to e-health implementation, and (ii) outstanding gaps in research on the subject. Methods MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, PSYCINFO and the Cochrane Library were searched for reviews published between 1 January 1995 and 17 March 2009. Studies had to be systematic reviews, narrative reviews, qualitative metasyntheses or meta-ethnographies of e-health implementation. Abstracts and papers were double screened and data were extracted on country of origin; e-health domain; publication date; aims and methods; databases searched; inclusion and exclusion criteria and number of papers included. Data were analysed qualitatively using normalization process theory as an explanatory coding framework. Findings Inclusion criteria were met by 37 papers; 20 had been published between 1995 and 2007 and 17 between 2008 and 2009. Methodological quality was poor: 19 papers did not specify the inclusion and exclusion criteria and 13 did not indicate the precise number of articles screened. The use of normalization process theory as a conceptual framework revealed that relatively little attention was paid to: (i) work directed at making sense of e-health systems, specifying their purposes and benefits, establishing their value to users and planning their implementation; (ii) factors promoting or inhibiting engagement and participation; (iii) effects on roles and responsibilities; (iv) risk management, and (v) ways in which implementation processes might be reconfigured by user-produced knowledge. Conclusion The published literature focused on organizational issues, neglecting the wider social framework that must be considered when introducing new technologies.



Publisher		World Health Organization
URL		http://dx.doi.org/10.2471/BLT.11.099424
DOI		10.2471/BLT.11.099424

Actions