Maintenance Notice

Due to necessary scheduled maintenance, the JMIR Publications website will be unavailable from Wednesday, July 01, 2020 at 8:00 PM to 10:00 PM EST. We apologize in advance for any inconvenience this may cause you.

Who will be affected?

Previously submitted to: JMIR Medical Informatics (no longer under consideration since Feb 21, 2019)

Date Submitted: Dec 3, 2018
Open Peer Review Period: Dec 7, 2018 - Dec 27, 2018
(closed for review but you can still tweet)

NOTE: This is an unreviewed Preprint

Warning: This is a unreviewed preprint (What is a preprint?). Readers are warned that the document has not been peer-reviewed by expert/patient reviewers or an academic editor, may contain misleading claims, and is likely to undergo changes before final publication, if accepted, or may have been rejected/withdrawn (a note "no longer under consideration" will appear above).

Peer-review me: Readers with interest and expertise are encouraged to sign up as peer-reviewer, if the paper is within an open peer-review period (in this case, a "Peer-Review Me" button to sign up as reviewer is displayed above). All preprints currently open for review are listed here. Outside of the formal open peer-review period we encourage you to tweet about the preprint.

Citation: Please cite this preprint only for review purposes or for grant applications and CVs (if you are the author).

Final version: If our system detects a final peer-reviewed "version of record" (VoR) published in any journal, a link to that VoR will appear below. Readers are then encourage to cite the VoR instead of this preprint.

Settings: If you are the author, you can login and change the preprint display settings, but the preprint URL/DOI is supposed to be stable and citable, so it should not be removed once posted.

Submit: To post your own preprint, simply submit to any JMIR journal, and choose the appropriate settings to expose your submitted version as preprint.

Warning: This is an author submission that is not peer-reviewed or edited. Preprints - unless they show as "accepted" - should not be relied on to guide clinical practice or health-related behavior and should not be reported in news media as established information.

Survey of Electronic Health Record (EHR) Systems in Kenyan Public Hospitals: A mixed-methods survey

  • Naomi Muinga; 
  • Steve Magare; 
  • Jonathan Monda; 
  • Mike English; 
  • Hamish Fraser; 
  • John Powell; 
  • Chris Paton

Background:

As healthcare facilities in Low- and Middle-Income Countries (LMICs) such as Kenya adopt Electronic Health Record (EHR) systems to improve hospital administration and patient care, it is important to understand the adoption process, identify the key stakeholders, and assess the capabilities of the systems in use.

Objective:

To describe the level of adoption of Electronic Health Records systems in public hospitals and understand the process of adoption from Health Management Information System (HMIS) system vendors and system users.

Methods:

We conducted a survey of County Health Records Information Officers (CHRIOs) in Kenya to determine the level of adoption of Electronic Health Records systems in public hospitals. We conducted site visits to hospitals to view systems in use and to interview hospital administrators and end users. We also interviewed Health Management Information System (HMIS) system vendors to understand the adoption process from their perspective.

Results:

From the survey of CHRIOs, all facilities mentioned had adopted some form of EHR. Hospitals commonly purchased systems for patient administration and hospital billing functions. Radiology and laboratory management systems were commonly standalone systems. There were varying levels of interoperability within facilities that had more than one system in operation. We only saw one in-patient EHR system in use although many vendors and hospital administrators we interviewed were planning to adopt or support such systems. From the user perspective, issues such as system usability, adequate training, availability of adequate infrastructure and system support emerged. From the vendor perspective, a wide range of services was available to the hospital though constrained by funding and the need to computerise service areas that were deemed as priority. Additionally, vendors were unable to implement some data sharing modules linking to national HMIS due to lack of appropriate policies to facilitate this and users’ lack of confidence in new technologies such as cloud services.

Conclusions:

EHR adoption in Kenya has been underway for some years, particularly in comprehensive care clinics, and hospitals are increasing purchasing systems to support administrative functions. Considerable support from government, donors and regional health informatics organisations will be required to enable hospitals to move to full EHR adoption for in-patient care.


 Citation

Please cite as:

Muinga N, Magare S, Monda J, English M, Fraser H, Powell J, Paton C

Survey of Electronic Health Record (EHR) Systems in Kenyan Public Hospitals: A mixed-methods survey

JMIR Preprints. 03/12/2018:12995

DOI: 10.2196/preprints.12995

URL: https://preprints.jmir.org/preprint/12995

Download PDF


Request queued. Please wait while the file is being generated. It may take some time.

© The authors. All rights reserved. This is a privileged document currently under peer-review/community review (or an accepted/rejected manuscript). Authors have provided JMIR Publications with an exclusive license to publish this preprint on it's website for review and ahead-of-print citation purposes only. While the final peer-reviewed paper may be licensed under a cc-by license on publication, at this stage authors and publisher expressively prohibit redistribution of this draft paper other than for review purposes.

Advertisement