Skip to main content

Table 1 Attitudes among three types of user toward the implementation of inter-hospital EPR exchange, descriptive statistics, factor analyses, and Bivariate GLM test (25 comprehensive questionnaire items of the attitudes)

From: Attitudes toward inter-hospital electronic patient record exchange: discrepancies among physicians, medical record staff, and patients

Items (in a scale of 1 ~ 5; 1 = disagree, 5 = agree) Extracted components Physician Medical record staff Patient
Mean SE Mean SE Mean SE
  Privacy of patient may be violated a Concern g 3.85 1.05 3.68 1.16 3.82 0.94
  Should protect privacy through the conditional implementation by consent of patient b *** Intention h 3.91 1.03 4.11 0.86 4.49 0.76
  Supporting the promotion of inter-hospital electronic patient records exchange c ** Intention 3.68 1.05 3.79 0.92 4.01 0.84
  User interface may affect the willingness to use the System d *** Function i 4.17 0.95 3.25 1.21   
  Comprehensive functions will increase the willingness to use the System e Function 4.12 0.93 4.18 0.82   
  The exchange system may have the data security problem Concern 3.94 1.05 4.04 1.04   
  Handling the exchange data increases work load Concern 3.32 1.18 3.18 1.12   
  Would like to share my orders with physicians in other hospitals Intention 3.64 0.97     
  Expect the System to provide more comprehensive patient records Intention 3.79 0.95    3.93 0.82
  Can increase quality of health care f ** Intention 3.63 0.99    3.89 0.78
  Can change habit of handwriting in medical records to avoid misunderstanding Concern 3.19 1.11     
  Can reduce repeated lab tests Intention 3.65 1.10     
  Can increase efficiency of diagnosis and treatment Intention 3.41 1.14     
  Concern about patient’s potential misunderstanding for the content of medical records Concern 3.86 1.03     
  Will benefit patient through continuing health care Intention 3.79 0.91     
  Will bring convenience to medical records operation Intention    3.82 0.77   
  Will save storage space for medical records Intention    3.86 0.80   
  May save manpower Intention    3.46 1.14   
  May increase efficiency of medical records management Intention    3.61 0.88   
  Understand the function of electronic patient records exchange Function      2.62 1.00
  May improve physician and patient relationship Function      3.80 0.88
  Do not care about the leak of personal medical information Intention      2.29 1.36
  Do not mind if physicians obtain my information through electronic exchange in case of a medical need Intention      3.59 1.05
  Exchanging hospitals will confidentially protect patient information Concern      3.69 1.13
  Electronic patient records provided by this system are reliable and safe Concern      4.44 0.80
  1. a Total mean = 3.82, SD = 1.00
  2. b Total mean = 4.23, SD = 0.93. Types of user and gender showed significant between-group differences (p <0.001, p = 0.009, respectively): Patient > medical record staff and physician
  3. c Total mean = 3.85, SD = 0.95. Types of user showed significant between-group differences (p = 0.005): Patient > physician
  4. d Types of user, gender, and age showed significant between-group differences (p <0.001, p = 0.410, p <0.001, respectively): physician > medical record staff
  5. e Experience of computer use showed significant between-group differences (p = 0.021)
  6. f Types of user, gender, and age showed significant between-group differences in this result (p = 0.005, p = 0.030, p = 0.001, respectively): Patient > physician
  7. g Concerns for EPR
  8. h Behavioral intention to use EPR
  9. i Perceived usefulness of functions and features
  10. ** p <0.01, *** p <0.001 among type of user