Skip to main navigation menu Skip to main content Skip to site footer

Original article

Vol. 140 No. 3738 (2010)

Utilisation of information technologies in ambulatory care in Switzerland

  • L Brunner
DOI
https://doi.org/10.4414/smw.2010.13088
Cite this as:
Swiss Med Wkly. 2010;140:w13088
Published
13.09.2010

Abstract

Background: The importance of electronic medical records for the healthcare system is well documented. IT enables easy storage, communication and decision support and can provide important tools in the care of chronically ill patients in the form of a reminder system.

Methods: A questionnaire was developed and send out to 1200 physicians extracted from the official data base. After four weeks the non-responders received a written reminder. Data collection started in December 2007 and was completed in February 2008.

Results: 719 questionnaires were received back, representing a response rate of 59.9%. The data revealed a significant underuse of electronic medical records (EMRs) and IT compared to other European countries. Smaller practices, older physicians and especially primary care physicians tended to use less EMR. Only 10.2% of all physicians declared an interest in considering investment in IT in the next three years, 66.9% expressly denied wishing to do so.

The most important barriers were the costs, the unclear benefit and a feared worsening of the doctor-patient-communication during consultation.

Conclusion: IT and especially EMRs are underused in daily ambulatory care in Switzerland. To increase the use of EMRs, several approaches could be helpful. First of all, the benefit of EMRs in daily routine care have to be increased as, for example, by decision support systems, tools to avoid pharmaceutical interactions and reminder systems to enable a proactive treatment of chronically ill patients. Furthermore, adequate approaches to offer appropriate reimbursement for the financial investments have to considered such as an additional payment for electronically generated, evidence based quality indicators.

References

  1. Bodenheimer T, Wagner EH, Grumbach K. Improving primary care for patients with chronic illness. JAMA. 2002;288(14):1775–9.
  2. Bodenheimer T, Wagner EH, Grumbach K. Improving primary care for patients with chronic illness: the chronic care model, Part 2. JAMA. 2002;288(15):1909–14.
  3. Stone JH. Communication between physicians and patients in the era of E-medicine. N Engl J Med. 2007;356(24):2451–4.
  4. Dobrev Aea. Benchmarking ICT use among General Practitioners in Europe. empirica: EUROPEAN COMMISSION Information Society and Media Directorate General 2008:116.
  5. Menachemi N, Perkins RM, van Durme DJ, Brooks RG. Examining the adoption of electronic health records and personal digital assistants by family physicians in Florida. Inform Prim Care. 2006;14(1):1–9.
  6. Keddie Z, Jones R. Information communications technology in general practice: cross-sectional survey in London. Inform Prim Care. 2005;13(2):113–23.
  7. Chaudhry B, Wang J, Wu S, Maglione M, Mojica W, Roth E, et al. Systematic review: impact of health information technology on quality, efficiency, and costs of medical care. Ann Intern Med. 2006;144(10):742–52.
  8. Hillestad R, Bigelow J, Bower A, Girosi F, Meili R, Scoville R, Taylor R. Can electronic medical record systems transform health care? Potential health benefits, savings, and costs. Health Aff. (Millwood) 2005;24(5):1103–17.
  9. Denz M. Konsequenzen der nationalen E-Health-Strategie. Schweiz Ärztezeitung. 2007;9:5.
  10. Giger M. E-Health 2008 – Prozesse definieren und Daten schützen. Schweiz Ärztezeitung. 2008;6:1.
  11. Bhend H. Health Professional Card der Schweizer Ärzteschaft ante portas. Schweiz Ärztezeitung. 2007;42:2.
  12. Oggier W. E-Health und die Arztpraxis. Schweiz Ärztezeitung. 2008;36:2.
  13. Campbell S, Reeves D, Kontopantelis E, Middleton E, Sibbald B, Roland M. Quality of primary care in England with the introduction of pay for performance. N Engl J Med. 2007;357(2):181–90.
  14. Falaschetti E, Campbell NR, Mohan S, Poulter N. Implementation of pay for performance policy in England. Hypertension. 2009;54(1):e5.
  15. Campbell SM, Reeves D, Kontopantelis E, Sibbald B, Roland M. Effects of pay for performance on the quality of primary care in England. N Engl J Med. 2009;361(4):368–78.
  16. Schoen C, Osborn R, How SK, Doty MM, Peugh J. In chronic condition: experiences of patients with complex health care needs, in eight countries, 2008. Health Aff. (Millwood) 2009;28(1):w1–16.
  17. Shojania KG, Ranji SR, McDonald KM, Grimshaw JM, Sundaram V, Rushakoff RJ, Owens DK. Effects of quality improvement strategies for type 2 diabetes on glycemic control: a meta-regression analysis. JAMA. 2006;296(4):427–40.
  18. Epping-Jordan JE, Pruitt SD, Bengoa R, Wagner EH. Improving the quality of health care for chronic conditions. Qual Saf Health Care. 2004;13(4):299–305.
  19. Wagner EH, Groves T. Care for chronic diseases. BMJ. 2002;325(7370):913–4.
  20. Ludwick DA, Doucette J. Primary Care Physicians’ Experience with Electronic Medical Records: Barriers to Implementation in a Fee-for-Service Environment. Int J Telemed Appl. 2009;2009:853524.
  21. Achieving Efficiency Improvements in the Health Sector through the Implementation of Information and Communication Technologies [http://ec.europa.eu/health/eu_world/docs/oecd_ict_en.pdf]