The purpose of this quantitative study is to determine nurses' perceptions of electronic documentation. Healthcare organizations have recognized the advantages of electronic documentation, such as legibility, organized data, and the simultaneous use of the record by multiple caregivers and the elimination of paper records. In keeping with a common response to change, nurses can be very resistant to relinquishing the traditional paper records. By collecting the nurses' perceptions of electronic documentation, information will be generated on a pivotal point in the success or failure of implementing and using electronic documentation.
The framework from Davis's 1986 Technology Acceptance Model uses perceived usefulness of the system and ease of use as ways of determining if nurses will use a system or not. The study population was 23 0 licensed vocational nurses and registered nurses who used electronic documentation and delivered direct patient care in the Women's Services department of a local hospital. The tool used to measure the nurses' perceptions was the Nurses Attitudes towards Computerization Questionnaire by Stronge and Brodt. The results of the study indicate that 52% of nurses feel that the Women's Services department of a local hospital. The tool used to measure the nurses' perceptions was the Nurses Attitudes towards Computerization Questionnaire by Stronge and Brodt. The results of the study indicate that 52% of nurses feel that computers made their job easier and that they had more time for professional tasks. The results also indicated that 64% of the nurses believed that computers offered a remarkable opportunity to improve patient care and that computers decrease repeated documentation. The majority of nurses (56%) disagreed with the idea that computers increase healthcare costs and that their use increased nurses' workloads.
|Commitee:||Reynolds, Grace, Sinay, Tony, Singh-Carlson, Savitri|
|School:||California State University, Long Beach|
|Department:||Health Care Administration|
|School Location:||United States -- California|
|Source:||MAI 51/04M(E), Masters Abstracts International|
Copyright in each Dissertation and Thesis is retained by the author. All Rights Reserved
The supplemental file or files you are about to download were provided to ProQuest by the author as part of a
dissertation or thesis. The supplemental files are provided "AS IS" without warranty. ProQuest is not responsible for the
content, format or impact on the supplemental file(s) on our system. in some cases, the file type may be unknown or
may be a .exe file. We recommend caution as you open such files.
Copyright of the original materials contained in the supplemental file is retained by the author and your access to the
supplemental files is subject to the ProQuest Terms and Conditions of use.
Depending on the size of the file(s) you are downloading, the system may take some time to download them. Please be