Information systems and the electronic health record in primary health care

Users' satisfaction with the primary health care information system in Croatia: a cross-sectional study

Aim

To evaluate the primary health care information system from the general practitioner's (GP) point of view.

Methods

Sixty-seven Croatian GPs were distributed a questionnaire about characteristics of the GP’s office, overall impression of the application, handling of daily routine information, more sophisticated information needs, and data security, and rated their satisfaction with each component from 1 to 5. We also compared two most frequently used applications – application with distantly installed software (DIS) and that with locally installed software (LIS, personal computer-based application).

Results

GPs were most satisfied with the daily procedures and the reminder component of the health information system (rating 4.1). The overall impression ranked second (3.5) and flexibility of applications followed closely (3.4). The most questionable aspect of applications was data security (3.0). LIS system received better overall rate than DIS (4.2 vs 3.2).

Conclusion

Applications received better ratings for daily routine use than for overall impression and ability to get specific information according the GPs’ needs. Poor ratings on the capability of the application, complaints about unreliable links, and doubts about data security point to a need for more user-friendly interfaces, more information on the capability of the application, and a valid certificate of assessment for every application.

Awareness and use of evidence-based medicine databases and Cochrane Library among physicians in Croatia

AIM

To assess awareness and use of evidence-based medicine (EBM) databases and The Cochrane Library among physicians in Croatia.

METHODS

A cross-sectional study with a telephone survey was performed among 573 physicians (88.6% response rate from 647 contacted physicians) from family practice and 4 major university hospital centers in Croatia. The main outcome measures were physicians' awareness of The Cochrane Collaboration, awareness and use of The Cochrane Library, access to EBM databases, and access to internet at work.

RESULTS

Overall, 54% of respondents said they had access to EBM databases, but when asked which databases they used, they named mostly non-EBM databases. The question on the highest level of evidence in EBM was correctly answered by 53% respondents, 30% heard of The Cochrane Collaboration, and 34% heard about The Cochrane Library. They obtained information about The Cochrane Library mostly from colleagues and research articles, whereas the information about EBM was gained mainly during continuous medical education. There were more respondents who thought The Cochrane Library could help them in practice (58%) than those who heard about The Cochrane Library (30%). Only 20% of the respondents heard about the initiative for the establishment of the Croatian branch of The Cochrane Collaboration. Family physicians had significantly lower level of awareness, knowledge, and use of EBM and The Cochrane Library than physicians from university hospitals.

CONCLUSION

There is low awareness about EBM and The Cochrane Library among physicians in Croatia, which creates a need for educational interventions about EBM for the benefit of health care in Croatia.