Point‐of‐care Cognitive Support Technology in Emergency Departments: A Scoping Review of Technology Acceptance by Clinicians
Objective Cognitive support technologies that support clinical decisions and practices in the emergency department (ED) have the potential to optimize patient care. However, limited uptake by clinicians can prevent successful implementation. A better understanding of acceptance of these technologies...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Academic emergency medicine 2018-05, Vol.25 (5), p.494-507 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
Zusammenfassung: | Objective
Cognitive support technologies that support clinical decisions and practices in the emergency department (ED) have the potential to optimize patient care. However, limited uptake by clinicians can prevent successful implementation. A better understanding of acceptance of these technologies from the clinician perspective is needed. We conducted a scoping review to synthesize diverse, emerging evidence on clinicians’ acceptance of point‐of‐care (POC) cognitive support technology in the ED.
Method
We systematically searched 10 electronic databases and gray literature published from January 2006 to December 2016. Studies of any design assessing an ED‐based POC cognitive support technology were considered eligible for inclusion. Studies were required to report outcome data for technology acceptance. Two reviewers independently screened studies for relevance and quality. Study quality was assessed using the Mixed‐Methods Appraisal Tool. A descriptive analysis of the features of POC cognitive support technology for each study is presented, illustrating trends in technology development and evaluation. A thematic analysis of clinician, technical, patient, and organizational factors associated with technology acceptance is also presented.
Results
Of the 1,563 references screened for eligibility, 24 met the inclusion criteria and were included in the review. Most studies were published from 2011 onward (88%), scored high for methodologic quality (79%), and examined POC technologies that were novel and newly introduced into the study setting (63%). Physician use of POC technology was the most commonly studied (67%). Technology acceptance was frequently conceptualized and measured by factors related to clinician attitudes and beliefs. Experience with the technology, intention to use, and actual use were also more common outcome measures of technology acceptance. Across studies, perceived usefulness was the most noteworthy factor impacting technology acceptance, and clinicians generally had positive perceptions of the use of POC cognitive support technology in the ED. However, the actual use of POC cognitive support technology reported by clinicians was low—use, by proportion of patient cases, ranged from 30% to 59%. Of the 24 studies, only two studies investigated acceptance of POC cognitive support technology currently implemented in the ED, offering “real‐world” clinical practice data. All other studies focused on acceptance of novel technologies. Technical |
---|---|
ISSN: | 1069-6563 1553-2712 |
DOI: | 10.1111/acem.13325 |