Shared patient information and trust: a qualitative study of a national eHealth system

Abstract

Abstract Background In Norway, as in other countries, national eHealth systems, such as the Summary Care Record (SCR), have been implemented to improve the collaboration around patients by sharing patient information between health professionals across healthcare institutions and administrative levels. Although widely implemented across the health and care services in Norway, evaluations of the SCR indicate less use than expected. There is a need for analysis that lays out the visions and expectations of the SCR and contrasts these with detailed observations of use in everyday health professional work. This study adds to the eHealth research field by exploring this reality. Method This paper has a qualitative design with an ethnographic approach, including participant observation, qualitative interviews, and a document review. Qualitative individual interviews with 22 health professionals and six weeks of participant observation were conducted, and eight documents were reviewed. The field notes and the interview-transcriptions were analyzed following a stepwise-deductive induction analysis. Results The document review identified the expectations and visions of the SCR, including an underlying assumption of trust in shared patient information. However, this assumption is implicit and not recognized as a crucial element for success in the documents. In our observation and interview data, we found that health professionals do not necessarily trust information in the SCR. In fact, several procedures and routines to assess the trustworthiness of SCR information were identified that complicate and disturb the expected use. In our analysis, two main themes characterize the health professionals' handling of the SCR: adapting to workflow and dealing with uncertainty. Conclusion Our study illustrates that unconditional trust in shared patient information is an implicit assumption in SCR policy documents, but in their everyday work health professionals do not necessarily unconditionally trust shared patient information. Rather, sharing patient information through technology, such as the SCR, requires of health professionals to critically assess the digital information. The information in the SCR, as all sources of information presented to health professionals, becomes an item for their constant trust-work. Our study is of value to policymakers, health information systems developers, and the field of practice both nationally and internationally.