Nur Yuliasih, Qisty A Khoiry, Sofa D Alfian, Auliya A Suwantika, Rizky Abdulah
{"title":"从卫生专业人员的角度来看,卫生信息系统使用的推动者和障碍:范围审查。","authors":"Nur Yuliasih, Qisty A Khoiry, Sofa D Alfian, Auliya A Suwantika, Rizky Abdulah","doi":"10.2147/JMDH.S515295","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>This study aimed to present factors that potentially influenced system use by identifying facilitator or barrier to acceptance from the perspective of healthcare professionals.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A scoping review was used in line with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) guidelines. The literature search was conducted on two electronic databases, Scopus and MEDLINE through PubMed, limiting the publication timeframe from January 2013 to December 2023. Moreover, a developed search strategy was used based on keywords and MeSH terms derived from the Population, Concept, and Context (PCC) components. The inclusion criteria were studies that discussed information system in healthcare, incorporated healthcare professionals who directly engaged with health information system (HIS), conducted within healthcare settings, identified facilitator or barrier to the use of information system in healthcare, and were available in full-text English. Barrier and facilitator were considered as factors impeding and promoting HIS use, respectively. The scoping review adopted a thematic analysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The results showed that a total of 79 studies met the inclusion criteria and were included in this review. A total of 16 distinct facilitators and 16 barriers were identified, which were then grouped into four categories, comprising colleague and social support, organizational, individual, as well as technological and technical contexts. The most frequently mentioned facilitator was usefulness and simplification of daily tasks, while the predominant barrier was lack of technical support.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The systematic mapping of facilitator and barrier provided a foundation for policymakers and healthcare professionals in decision-making processes to enhance acceptance HIS.</p>","PeriodicalId":16357,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Multidisciplinary Healthcare","volume":"18 ","pages":"3901-3920"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12248237/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Facilitator and Barrier to Health Information System Use from Health Professionals Perspective: A Scoping Review.\",\"authors\":\"Nur Yuliasih, Qisty A Khoiry, Sofa D Alfian, Auliya A Suwantika, Rizky Abdulah\",\"doi\":\"10.2147/JMDH.S515295\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>This study aimed to present factors that potentially influenced system use by identifying facilitator or barrier to acceptance from the perspective of healthcare professionals.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A scoping review was used in line with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) guidelines. The literature search was conducted on two electronic databases, Scopus and MEDLINE through PubMed, limiting the publication timeframe from January 2013 to December 2023. Moreover, a developed search strategy was used based on keywords and MeSH terms derived from the Population, Concept, and Context (PCC) components. The inclusion criteria were studies that discussed information system in healthcare, incorporated healthcare professionals who directly engaged with health information system (HIS), conducted within healthcare settings, identified facilitator or barrier to the use of information system in healthcare, and were available in full-text English. Barrier and facilitator were considered as factors impeding and promoting HIS use, respectively. The scoping review adopted a thematic analysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The results showed that a total of 79 studies met the inclusion criteria and were included in this review. A total of 16 distinct facilitators and 16 barriers were identified, which were then grouped into four categories, comprising colleague and social support, organizational, individual, as well as technological and technical contexts. The most frequently mentioned facilitator was usefulness and simplification of daily tasks, while the predominant barrier was lack of technical support.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The systematic mapping of facilitator and barrier provided a foundation for policymakers and healthcare professionals in decision-making processes to enhance acceptance HIS.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":16357,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Multidisciplinary Healthcare\",\"volume\":\"18 \",\"pages\":\"3901-3920\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-07-07\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12248237/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Multidisciplinary Healthcare\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2147/JMDH.S515295\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Multidisciplinary Healthcare","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2147/JMDH.S515295","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
Facilitator and Barrier to Health Information System Use from Health Professionals Perspective: A Scoping Review.
Objective: This study aimed to present factors that potentially influenced system use by identifying facilitator or barrier to acceptance from the perspective of healthcare professionals.
Methods: A scoping review was used in line with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) guidelines. The literature search was conducted on two electronic databases, Scopus and MEDLINE through PubMed, limiting the publication timeframe from January 2013 to December 2023. Moreover, a developed search strategy was used based on keywords and MeSH terms derived from the Population, Concept, and Context (PCC) components. The inclusion criteria were studies that discussed information system in healthcare, incorporated healthcare professionals who directly engaged with health information system (HIS), conducted within healthcare settings, identified facilitator or barrier to the use of information system in healthcare, and were available in full-text English. Barrier and facilitator were considered as factors impeding and promoting HIS use, respectively. The scoping review adopted a thematic analysis.
Results: The results showed that a total of 79 studies met the inclusion criteria and were included in this review. A total of 16 distinct facilitators and 16 barriers were identified, which were then grouped into four categories, comprising colleague and social support, organizational, individual, as well as technological and technical contexts. The most frequently mentioned facilitator was usefulness and simplification of daily tasks, while the predominant barrier was lack of technical support.
Conclusion: The systematic mapping of facilitator and barrier provided a foundation for policymakers and healthcare professionals in decision-making processes to enhance acceptance HIS.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Multidisciplinary Healthcare (JMDH) aims to represent and publish research in healthcare areas delivered by practitioners of different disciplines. This includes studies and reviews conducted by multidisciplinary teams as well as research which evaluates or reports the results or conduct of such teams or healthcare processes in general. The journal covers a very wide range of areas and we welcome submissions from practitioners at all levels and from all over the world. Good healthcare is not bounded by person, place or time and the journal aims to reflect this. The JMDH is published as an open-access journal to allow this wide range of practical, patient relevant research to be immediately available to practitioners who can access and use it immediately upon publication.