Advertisement

Using a Survey Methodology to Measure User Satisfaction with Clinical Information Systems

  • Jonathan L. Schaffer
  • Peter Haddad
  • Nilmini Wickramasinghe
Chapter
Part of the Healthcare Delivery in the Information Age book series (Healthcare Delivery Inform. Age)

Abstract

The healthcare industry is increasingly investing in information systems/information technology to enhance patient outcomes and organizational performance. Although user satisfaction is key to realizing the benefits of these large investments, the determinant factor for user satisfaction with clinical information systems is still not well understood. This study qualitatively investigates the relationship between the overall satisfaction and five key aspects of clinical information systems, namely, key functionalities; efficiency of use; intuitiveness of graphical user interfaces (GUI); communication, collaboration, and information exchange; and interoperability and compatibility issues. The results show that intuitive, easy-to-use, and collaboration enabling systems are more likely to satisfy users. The level of technical support and training also play key roles in determining user satisfaction in the clinical domain.

Keywords

Clinical information systems Interoperability User satisfaction Usability 

References

  1. Abelein, U., & Paech, B. (2015). Understanding the influence of user participation and involvement on system success–A systematic mapping study. Empirical Software Engineering, 20, 28–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Adam Mahmood, M. O., Burn, J. M., Gemoets, L. A., & Jacquez, C. (2000). Variables affecting information technology end-user satisfaction: a meta-analysis of the empirical literature. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 52, 751–771.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Adler, K. G. (2007). How to successfully navigate your EHR implementation. Family Practice Management, 14, 33.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Ammenwerth, E., Iller, C., & Mahler, C. (2006). IT-adoption and the interaction of task, technology and individuals: a fit framework and a case study. BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making, 6, 3.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  5. Baruch, Y., & Holtom, B. C. (2008). Survey response rate levels and trends in organizational research. Human Relations, 61, 1139–1160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bharati, P., & Chaudhury, A. (2006). Product customization on the web: An empirical study of factors impacting choiceboard user satisfaction. Information Resources Management Journal, 19(2), 69–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Cresswell, K. M., Bates, D. W., & Sheikh, A. (2013). Ten key considerations for the successful implementation and adoption of large-scale health information technology. Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association, 20, e9–e13.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  8. Davern, M. J., & Kauffman, R. J. (2000). Discovering potential and realizing value from information technology investments. Journal of Management Information Systems, 16, 121–143.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Dwivedi, Y. K., Kapoor, K. K., Williams, M. D., & Williams, J. (2013). RFID systems in libraries: An empirical examination of factors affecting system use and user satisfaction. International Journal of Information Management, 33, 367–377.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Fichman, R. G., & Melville, N. P. (2014). How posture-profile misalignment in IT innovation diminishes returns: Conceptual development and empirical demonstration. Journal of Management Information Systems, 31, 203–240.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Gartner, I. (2015). Gartner Says Worldwide IT Spending Across Vertical Industries to Decline 3.5 Percent in 2015. Stamford, CT: Gartner.Google Scholar
  12. Haddad, P., Gregory, M., & Wickramasinghe, N. (2014). Evaluating business value of IT in healthcare in Australia: The case of an intelligent operational planning support tool solution. In Bled 2014. AIS Electronic Library.Google Scholar
  13. Haddad, P., Schaffer, J., & Wickramasinghe, N. (2015). Evaluating business value of IT in healthcare: Three clinical practices from Australia and the US. In MEDINFO 2015: EHealth-enabled health: Proceedings of the 15th world congress on health and biomedical informatics (p. 183). Amsterdam: IOS Press.Google Scholar
  14. Maldonado, M., & Sierra, V. (2013). User satisfaction as the foundation of the success following an ERP adoption: an empirical study from Latin America. International Journal of Enterprise Information Systems (IJEIS), 9, 77–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Miller, L. (2004). User satisfaction surveys. Australasian Public Libraries and Information Services, 17, 125.Google Scholar
  16. Nguyen, L., Haddad, P., Mogimi, F., Coleman, K., Redley, B., Botti, M., & Wickramasinghe, N. (2015). Developing an information system for nursing in acute care contexts. In PACIS 2015 Proceedings, Singapore, 2015.Google Scholar
  17. Wickramasinghe, N., & Schaffer, J. L. (2010). Realizing value driven e-health solutions, Improving healthcare series. Washington, DC: IBM Center for the Business of Government.Google Scholar
  18. Wickramasinghe, N., Kent, B., Moghimi, F., Stien, M., Nguyen, L., Redley, B., Taylor, N., & Botti, M. (2014). Using technology solutions to streamline healthcare processes for nursing: The case of an intelligent operational planning support tool (IOPST) solution. In N. Wickramasinghe, L. Al-Hakim, C. Gonzalez, & J. Tan (Eds.), Lean thinking for healthcare (pp. 405–430). New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Xiong, B., Skitmore, M., Xia, B., Masrom, M. A., Ye, K., & Bridge, A. (2014). Examining the influence of participant performance factors on contractor satisfaction: A structural equation model. International Journal of Project Management, 32, 482–491.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jonathan L. Schaffer
    • 1
  • Peter Haddad
    • 2
    • 3
  • Nilmini Wickramasinghe
    • 2
    • 3
  1. 1.Cleveland ClinicClevelandUSA
  2. 2.Faculty of HealthDeakin UniversityMelbourneAustralia
  3. 3.Health Informatics Management UnitEpworth HealthCareRichmondAustralia

Personalised recommendations