RT Journal Article
SR Electronic
T1 Digital maturity and its determinants in General Practice: a cross-sectional study in 20 countries
JF medRxiv
FD Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press
SP 2022.08.23.22278753
DO 10.1101/2022.08.23.22278753
A1 Fábia Teixeira
A1 Edmond Li
A1 Liliana Laranjo
A1 Claire Collins
A1 Greg Irving
A1 Maria Jose Fernandez
A1 Josip Car
A1 Mehmet Ungan
A1 Davorina Petek
A1 Robert Hoffman
A1 Azeem Majeed
A1 Katarzyna Nessler
A1 Heidrun Lingner
A1 Geronimo Jimenez
A1 Ara Darzi
A1 Cristina Jácome
A1 Ana Luísa Neves
YR 2022
UL http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2022/08/24/2022.08.23.22278753.abstract
AB Background The extension to which digital technologies are employed to promote the delivery of high-quality healthcare is known as Digital Maturity. Individuals’ and systems’ digital maturity are both necessary to ensure a successful, scalable and sustainable digital transformation in healthcare. Digital maturity in primary care has been scarcely evaluated.Objectives This study assessed the digital maturity - as a whole and in its dimensions - in General Practice and evaluated how participants’ demographic characteristics, practice characteristics and features of Electronic Health Records (EHRs) use are associated with digital maturity.Methods General Practitioners (GPs) across 20 countries completed an online questionnaire between June and September 2020. Demographic data, practice characteristics and features of EHRs use were collected. Digital maturity was evaluated through a framework built upon usage, resources and ability (divided in this study in its collective and individual components), interoperability, general evaluation methods and impact of digital technologies. Each dimension was rated as 1 or 0. The digital maturity score is the sum of the six dimensions and ranges from 0 to 6 (maximum digital maturity). Multivariable linear regression was used to model the total score, while multivariable logistic regression was used to model the probability of meeting each dimension of the score.Results 1,600 GPs (61% female, 68% Europeans) participated. GPs had a median digital maturity of 4 (P25-P75: 3-5). Positive associations with digital maturity were found for: being male (B=0.18 [95%CI 0.01;0.36]), use of EHRs for longer periods (B=0.45 [95%CI 0.35;0.54]) and higher frequencies of access to EHRs (B=0.33 [95%CI 0.17;0.48]). Practising in a rural setting was negatively associated with digital maturity (B=-0.25 [95%CI −0.43;-0.08]). Usage (90%) was the most acknowledged dimension while interoperability (47%) and use of best practice general evaluation methods (28%) were the least. Shorter durations of EHRs use were negatively associated with all digital maturity dimensions (aOR from 0.09 to 0.77).Conclusions Our study demonstrated notable factors that impact digital maturity and exposed discrepancies in digital transformation across healthcare settings. It provides a roadmap for policymakers to develop more efficacious interventions to hasten and take the best advantage of digital transformation in General Practice.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Funding StatementThis project is supported by a grant from the European General Practice Research Network. ALN is funded by Imperial NIHR Patient Safety Translational Research Centre, with infrastructure support from the Imperial NIHR Biomedical Research Centre. Sponsors had no role on the approval of the manuscript for publication.Author DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:It was granted ethical approval from the Imperial College Research Ethics Committee (Reference 20IC5956), which oversees health-related research with human participants.I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.YesI understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).YesI have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.YesThe subsets of the database analyzed for this study are available upon reasonable request to the corresponding author.