Skip to main content

Table 2 Perceived barriers to EMRS implementation in an Indian private-sector hospital

From: Perceived benefits and barriers of medical doctors regarding electronic medical record systems in an Indian private-sector healthcare facility

Barriers

Major barrier n (%)

Possible to manage n (%)

Not applicable n (%)

Total N

Financial components

 Lack of funds

43 (44)

47 (48)

9 (9)

99

 Capital investment

35 (37)

47 (47.5)

12 (13)

94

Organizational components

 Time management*

27 (29)

62 (65)

6 (6)

95

 Lack of infrastructure

47 (47)

45 (44)

9 (9)

101

 Lack of staff

57 (56)

36 (35)

9 (9)

102

 Staff resistance**

51 (52)

33 (33)

15 (15)

99

 Lack of IT personnel

59 (58)

35 (35)

7 (7)

101

 Staff competency

51 (51)

41 (41)

8 (8)

100

 Lack of staff coordination

47 (48)

46 (46)

6 (6)

99

 Possible loss of productivity

34 (34)

50 (50.5)

15 (15)

99

 Changeover of information

30 (31)

50 (51.5)

17 (17.5)

97

 Lack of a trainer on EMR

44 (44.5)

47 (47.5)

8 (9)

99

 Lack of management support

47 (46)

44 (43)

11 (11)

102

Legal issues

 Concerns for confidentiality breaches

31 (31)

55 (55)

14 (14)

100

 Regulations of electronic signatures

29 (29)

59 (60)

11 (11)

99

 Legal acceptability of EMRS

25 (26)

52 (54)

19 (20)

96

Technological issues

 Finding a convenient system

39 (39)

54 (53)

8 (8)

101

 Concerns about the EMR system updates

22 (22)

57 (56.5)

22 (22)

101

 Unreliable Internet access

42 (42)

44 (44)

14 (14)

100

 Incompatibilities of Software/hardware

37 (37)

53 (53)

10 (10)

100

 Training about EMRS

39 (39)

55 (55)

6 (6)

100

  1. *Pearson chi2 (χÂČ test), Pearson χÂČ= 6.1662, P = 0.046. **Pearson chi2 (χÂČ test), Pearson χÂČ= 26.3529 P = 0.049. The percentages are rounded off to the nearest number