Employees’ work environment and patients’ rights, conflicting responsibilities when implementing patient online access to their EHR
Erlingsdottir, Gudbjörg LU and Petersson, Lena LU
(2016)
HEPS Healthcare and Society
- Abstract
- This paper is based on an interview study examining the implementation of the eHealth service patient online access to electronic health records in two county councils in Sweden. Our aim is to present and discuss the two councils’ implementation processes and the differences between them, with particular focus on the implementers’ consideration of caregivers’ work environment. A theoretical aim is to shed light on the complicated situation that arises when a county council is responsible for both the implementation of an eHealth service and the effects it has on the work environment of the employees (professionals). The results from the total of 16 semi-structured in-depth interviews show that the two county councils differ in the... (More)
- This paper is based on an interview study examining the implementation of the eHealth service patient online access to electronic health records in two county councils in Sweden. Our aim is to present and discuss the two councils’ implementation processes and the differences between them, with particular focus on the implementers’ consideration of caregivers’ work environment. A theoretical aim is to shed light on the complicated situation that arises when a county council is responsible for both the implementation of an eHealth service and the effects it has on the work environment of the employees (professionals). The results from the total of 16 semi-structured in-depth interviews show that the two county councils differ in the following areas: 1) whether the implementation is interpreted as a threat for the work environment; 2) who the interviewees consider as responsible for the work environment; and 3) if it was considered important to build trust between the implementers (the county councils) and the professionals – and how this trustbuilding was accomplished. It is concluded that the differences between the two implementation processes was due in part to the difference in how the service was framed and labelled in the two respective county councils, and that one of the county councils has encountered difficulties in taking dual responsibility towards both patients and the work environment of the employees. This implies, according to Bovens’ (1998) classification, that one of the county councils takes active responsibility for the work environment while the other takes passive responsibility for the work environment. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
https://lup.lub.lu.se/record/623726ac-ab4d-4625-b758-88ecae6fb475
- author
- Erlingsdottir, Gudbjörg
LU
and Petersson, Lena
LU
- organization
- publishing date
- 2016-10-05
- type
- Contribution to conference
- publication status
- published
- subject
- pages
- 5 pages
- conference name
- HEPS Healthcare and Society
- conference location
- Toulouse, France
- conference dates
- 2016-10-04 - 2016-10-07
- language
- English
- LU publication?
- yes
- id
- 623726ac-ab4d-4625-b758-88ecae6fb475
- date added to LUP
- 2016-11-22 11:45:58
- date last changed
- 2021-03-22 21:04:55
@misc{623726ac-ab4d-4625-b758-88ecae6fb475,
abstract = {{This paper is based on an interview study examining the implementation of the eHealth service patient online access to electronic health records in two county councils in Sweden. Our aim is to present and discuss the two councils’ implementation processes and the differences between them, with particular focus on the implementers’ consideration of caregivers’ work environment. A theoretical aim is to shed light on the complicated situation that arises when a county council is responsible for both the implementation of an eHealth service and the effects it has on the work environment of the employees (professionals). The results from the total of 16 semi-structured in-depth interviews show that the two county councils differ in the following areas: 1) whether the implementation is interpreted as a threat for the work environment; 2) who the interviewees consider as responsible for the work environment; and 3) if it was considered important to build trust between the implementers (the county councils) and the professionals – and how this trustbuilding was accomplished. It is concluded that the differences between the two implementation processes was due in part to the difference in how the service was framed and labelled in the two respective county councils, and that one of the county councils has encountered difficulties in taking dual responsibility towards both patients and the work environment of the employees. This implies, according to Bovens’ (1998) classification, that one of the county councils takes active responsibility for the work environment while the other takes passive responsibility for the work environment.}},
author = {{Erlingsdottir, Gudbjörg and Petersson, Lena}},
language = {{eng}},
month = {{10}},
title = {{Employees’ work environment and patients’ rights, conflicting responsibilities when implementing patient online access to their EHR}},
url = {{https://lup.lub.lu.se/search/files/17263366/HEPS2016_Erlingsdottir_2_.pdf}},
year = {{2016}},
}