Technological viewpoints (frames) about electronic prescribing in physician practices

Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association

Volumn 17, Issue 4, 2010, Pages 425-431

  Agarwal, Ritu ^a   Angst, Corey M ^b   DesRoches, Catherine M ^c   Fischer, Michael A ^d  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF NOTRE DAME   (United States)

^c MASSACHUSETTS GENERAL HOSPITAL   (United States)

^d BRIGHAM AND WOMEN S HOSPITAL   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; ELECTRONIC PRESCRIBING; HEALTH CARE MANAGEMENT; HUMAN; MEDICAL INFORMATION SYSTEM; MEDICAL PRACTICE; MEDICAL STAFF; MEDICAL TECHNOLOGY; NURSE; PHYSICIAN; SEMI STRUCTURED INTERVIEW; TRIANGULATION; ATTITUDE TO COMPUTERS; CLINICAL PRACTICE; HEALTH CARE PLANNING; MANAGEMENT; MASS COMMUNICATION; ORGANIZATION; ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT; QUALITATIVE RESEARCH; SYSTEM ANALYSIS; UNITED STATES;

ATTITUDE TO COMPUTERS; DECISION MAKING, ORGANIZATIONAL; DIFFUSION OF INNOVATION; EFFICIENCY, ORGANIZATIONAL; ELECTRONIC PRESCRIBING; HEALTH PLAN IMPLEMENTATION; HUMANS; PHYSICIAN'S PRACTICE PATTERNS; PRACTICE MANAGEMENT, MEDICAL; QUALITATIVE RESEARCH; UNITED STATES; WORKFLOW;

EID: 77958185408     PISSN: 10675027     EISSN: 1527974X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1136/jamia.2009.001826     Document Type: Article

References (48)

1. Pan E, Johnston D, Adler-Milstein J, et al. The Value of Healthcare Information Exchange and Interoperability. Boston, MA: Center for Information Technology Leadership, 2004.
2. Blumenthal D, DesRoches C, Donelan K, et al. Health Information Technology in the United States: The Information Base for Progress. Boston, MA: Institute for Health Policy, George Washington University Medical Center, and Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, 2006.
3. Ash JS, Berg M, Coiera E. Some Unintended Consequences of Information Technology in Health Care: The nature of patient care information system related errors. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2004;11:104-12.
4. Estabrooks C, O'Leary K, Ricker K, et al. The Internet and Access to Evidence: How are nurses positioned? J Adv Nurs 2003;42:73-81.
5. Gioia DA. Symbols, scripts and sensemaking: Creating meaning in the organizational experience. In: Sims HP, Gioia DA, eds. The thinking organization. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass, 1986:49-74.
6. Harrison M, Koppel R, Bar-Lev S. Unintended consequences of information technologies in health cared-an interactive sociotechnical analysis. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2007;14:542-9.
7. Orlikowski WJ, Gash DC. Technological frames: making sense of information technology in organizations. ACM T Inform Syst 1994;12:174-207.
8. Murff H, Kannry J. Physician Satisfaction with Two Order Entry Systems. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2001;8:499-511.
9. Moen A, Brennan PF. HEALTH@HOME: The Work of health information management in the household (HIMH): Implications for consumer health informatics (CHI) innovations. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2005;12:648-56.
10. Elsbach KD, Barr PS, Hargadon AB. Identifying situated cognition in organizations. Organ Sci 2005;16:422-33.
11. Chattopadhyay P, Glick WH, Huber GP. Organizational actions in response to threats and opportunities. Acad Manage J 2001;44:937-55.
12. National Progress Report on E-Prescribing. Washington, DC: SureScripts, 2007.
13. Gandhi TK, Weingart SN, Seger AC, et al. Outpatient prescribing errors and the impact of computerized prescribing. J Gen Intern Med 2005;20:837-41.
14. Gandhi T, Weingart S, Borus J, et al. Adverse drug events in ambulatory care. N Engl J Med 2003;348:1556-64.
15. Fischer MA, Vogeli C, Stedman M, et al. Effect of Electronic Prescribing With Formulary Decision Support on Medication Use and Cost. Arch Intern Med 2008;168:2433-9.
16. Tierney WM, Miller ME, Overhage JM, et al. Physician Inpatient Order Writing on Microcomputer Workstations: Effects on resource utilization. JAMA 1993;269:379-83.
17. Electronic prescribing. 2009. http://library.ahima.org/xpedio/groups/public/documents/ahima/bok1_021589.hcsp?dDocName=bok1_021589 (accessed 18 Feb 2009).
18. ePrescribing. 2009. http://www.cms.hhs.gov/eprescribing/(accessed 1 Mar 2009).
19. Friedman CP, Wyatt JC. Subjectivist approaches to evaluations. In: Friedman CP, Wyatt JC, eds. Evaluation methods in medical informatics. New York: Springer-Verlag, 1997:205-21.
20. Morgan DL. Focus groups as qualitative research. 2nd edn. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, 1997.
21. Sofaer S. Qualitative methods: what are they and why use them? Health Serv Res 1999;34(5 Part 2):1101-18.
22. Office of Behavioral and Social Sciences Research. Qualitative Methods in health research: opportunities and considerations in application and review. Washington, DC: National Institutes of Health, 1999. Report No: 02-5046.
23. Dubé L, Paré G. Rigor in information systems positivist case research: current practices, trends, and recommendations. MIS Quart 2003;27:597-636.
24. Silverman D. Interpreting qualitative data: methods for analysing talk, text and interaction. London: Sage, 1993.
25. Hammersley M, Atkinson P. Ethnography: principle in practice. London: Tavistock, 1983.
26. Bernard H. Research methods in anthropology: qualitative and quantitative approaches. Walnut Creek, CA: Altamira Press, 2001.
27. Atkinson P. The ethnography of a medical setting: reading, writing and rhetoric. Qual Health Res 1992;2:451-74.
28. Weber M. Methodology of the social sciences. New York: Free Press, 1949.
29. Robinson WS. The logical structure of analytic induction. Am Sociol Rev 1951;16:812-18.
30. Gilgun J. We shared something special: the moral discourse of incest perpetrators. J Marr Fam 1995;57:265-81.
31. Tobin G, Begley C. Methodological rigour within a qualitative framework. J Adv Nurs 2004;48:388-96.
32. Fisher B. The revolution in breast cancer surgery: science or anecdotalism? World J Surg 1985;9:655-66.
33. Melville N, Kraemer K, Gurbaxani V. Review: Information technology and organizational performance: An integrative model of IT business value. MIS Quart 2004;28:283-322.
34. Iacono S, Kling R. Changing office technologies and transformations of clerical jobs: a historical perspective. In: Kraut RE, ed. Technology and the Transformation of White-Collar Work. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, 1987:53-75.
35. Koch C. Off the chart: CIO Magazine, 2003.
36. Lapointe L, Rivard S. A multilevel model of resistance to information technology implementation. MIS Quart 2005;29:461-91.
37. Christensen CM. The innovator's dilemma. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press, 1997.
38. Adner R. When are technologies disruptive? a demand-based view of the emergence of competition. Strategic Manage J 2002;23:667-88.
39. Debruyne M, Reibstein DJ. Competitor see, competitor do: incumbent entry in new market niches. Mark Sci 2005;24:55-66. Winter.
40. King A, Tucci CL. Incumbent entry into new market niches: the role of experience and managerial choice in the creation of dynamic capabilities. Manage Sci 2002;48:171-86.
41. Block L, Keller P. When to accentuate the negative: the effects of perceived efficacy and message framing on intentions to perform a health-related behavior. J Mark Res 1995;32:192-203.
42. Levin I, Schneider S, Gaeth G. All Frames are not created equal: a typology and critical analysis of framing effects. Organ Behav Hum Decis Process 1998; 76:149-88.
43. Brown SH, Coney RD. Changes in physicians' computer anxiety and attitudes related to clinical information system use. J Am Med Inform Assoc 1994;1:381-94.
44. Larum H, Ellingsen G, Faxvaag A. Doctors' use of electronic medical records systems in hospitals: cross sectional survey. BMJ 2001;323:1344-8.
45. Marakas G, Hornik S. Passive resistance misuse: overt support and covert recalcitrance in IS implementation. Eur J Inform Syst 1996;5:208-19.
46. Electronic Prescribing Becoming Mainstream Practice. A collaborative report from the eHealth Initiative and the Center for Improving Medication Management. Washington, DC and Alexandria, VA: eHI and CIMM, 2008.
47. Guba EG. Criteria for assessing the trustworthiness of naturalistic inquiries. Educ Commun Technol J 1981;29:75-91.
48. Guba EG, Lincoln YS. Fourth Generation Evaluation. Newbury Park, CA: Sage, 1989.