BackgroundElectronic health record (EHR) implementation is currently underway in Canada, as in many other countries. These ambitious projects involve many stakeholders with unique perceptions of the implementation process. EHR users have an important role to play as they must integrate the EHR system into their work environments and use it in their everyday activities. Users hold valuable, first-hand knowledge of what can limit or contribute to the success of EHR implementation projects. A comprehensive synthesis of EHR users' perceptions is key to successful future implementation. This systematic literature review was aimed to synthesize current knowledge of the barriers and facilitators influencing shared EHR implementation among its various users.MethodsCovering a period from 1999 to 2009, a literature search was conducted on nine electronic databases. Studies were included if they reported on users' perceived barriers and facilitators to shared EHR implementation, in healthcare settings comparable to Canada. Studies in all languages with an empirical study design were included. Quality and relevance of the studies were assessed. Four EHR user groups were targeted: physicians, other health care professionals, managers, and patients/public. Content analysis was performed independently by two authors using a validated extraction grid with pre-established categorization of barriers and facilitators for each group of EHR users.ResultsOf a total of 5,695 potentially relevant publications identified, 117 full text publications were obtained after screening titles and abstracts. After review of the full articles, 60 publications, corresponding to 52 studies, met the inclusion criteria. The most frequent adoption factors common to all user groups were design and technical concerns, ease of use, interoperability, privacy and security, costs, productivity, familiarity and ability with EHR, motivation to use EHR, patient and health professional interaction, and lack of time and workload. Each user group also identified factors specific to their professional and individual priorities.ConclusionsThis systematic review presents innovative research on the barriers and facilitators to EHR implementation. While important similarities between user groups are highlighted, differences between them demonstrate that each user group also has a unique perspective of the implementation process that should be taken into account.

This review summarizes current knowledge on factors related to e-prescribing implementation in primary care that could support decision makers in their design of effective implementation strategies. Finally, future studies should emphasize on the perceptions of other user groups, such as pharmacists, managers, vendors, and patients, who remain neglected in the literature.

Interventions regarding a decision about prenatal testing for Down syndrome should address many decisional needs, which may indeed vary among the parties involved, whether women, their partners or health professionals. Very little is known about the decisional needs of partners and health professionals.

BackgroundInteroperable electronic health record (EHR) solutions are currently being implemented in Canada, as in many other countries. Understanding EHR users’ perspectives is key to the success of EHR implementation projects. This Delphi study aimed to assess in the Canadian context the applicability, the importance, and the priority of pre-identified factors from a previous mixed-methods systematic review of international literature.MethodsA three-round Delphi study was held with representatives of 4 Canadian EHR user groups defined as partners of the implementation process who use or are expected to use EHR in their everyday activity. These groups are: non-physician healthcare professionals, health information professionals, managers, and physicians. Four bilingual online questionnaire versions were developed from factors identified by the systematic review. Participants were asked to rate the applicability and the importance of each factor. The main outcome measures were consensus and priority. Consensus was defined a priori as strong (≥ 75%) or moderate (≥ 60-74%) according to user groups’ level of agreement on applicability and importance, partial (≥ 60%) when participants agreed only on applicability or importance, or as no consensus (< 60%). Priority for decision-making was defined as factors with strong consensus with scores of 4 or 5 on a five-point Likert scale for applicability and importance.ResultsThree Delphi rounds were completed by 64 participants. Levels of consensus of 100%, 64%, 64%, and 44% were attained on factors submitted to non-physician healthcare professionals, health information professionals, managers, and physicians, respectively. While agreement between and within user groups varied, key factors were prioritized if they were classified as strong (≥ 75% from questionnaire answers of user groups), for decision-making concerning EHR implementation. The10 factors that were prioritized are perceived usefulness, productivity, motivation, participation of end-users in the implementation strategy, patient and health professional interaction, lack of time and workload, resources availability, management, outcome expectancy, and interoperability.ConclusionsAmongst all factors influencing EHR implementation identified in a previous systematic review, ten were prioritized through this Delphi study. The varying levels of agreement between and within user groups could mean that users’ perspectives of each factor are complex and that each user group has unique professional priorities and roles in the EHR implementation process. As more EHR implementations in Canada are completed it will be possible to corroborate this preliminary result with a larger population of EHR users.

No abstract

BACKGROUND: Early identification of pregnant women at risk for preeclampsia is a priority to implement preventive measures. Some biochemical and ultrasonographic parameters have shown promising predictive performance, but so far there is no clinically validated screening procedure.CONTENT: Using a series of keywords, we reviewed electronic databases (Medline, Embase, all records to May 2009) reporting the performance of biological and ultrasonographic markers to predict preeclampsia, both single markers and combinations of markers. We analyzed the data according to gestational age and risk levels of the studied populations. We evaluated the methodological quality of included publications using QUADAS (quality assessment of diagnostic accuracy studies). We identified 37 relevant studies that assessed 71 different combinations of biochemical and ultrasonographic markers. Most studies were performed during the second trimester on small-scale high-risk populations with few cases of preeclampsia. Combinations of markers generally led to an increase in sensitivity and/or specificity compared with single markers. In low-risk populations, combinations including placental protein 13 (PP13), pregnancy-associated plasma protein A (PAPP-A), a disintegrin and metalloprotease-12 (ADAM12), activin A, or inhibin A measured in first or early second trimester and uterine artery Doppler in second trimester appear promising (sensitivity 60%-80%, specificity Ͼ80%). In high-risk populations, the combination of PP13 and pulsatility index in first tri-

We report in human neutrophils (PMN) that phospholipase D (PLD) was stimulated by micromolar concentrations of arachidonic acid (AA) and nanomolar concentrations of leukotriene B(4) (LTB(4)), and eicosapentaenoic acid was inactive. The stimulatory effect of AA occurred only when adenosine was eliminated from PMN suspensions or when PMN were incubated with adenosine A(2A) receptor antagonists. The mechanism of AA-induced PLD activation was investigated. The results show that AA- and LTB(4)-induced PLD activation were inhibited by the LTB(4) receptor 1 (BLTR1) antagonist CP 105,696, whereas the LTA(4) hydrolase inhibitor SC57461A and the LT biosynthesis inhibitor MK-0591 inhibited AA- but not LTB(4)-mediated PLD activation. The AA-induced ARF1 and RhoA translocation to PMN membranes was inhibited by CP 105,696 and SC57461A. These results provide evidence of a requirement for an autocrine-stimulatory loop involving LTB(4) and BLTR1 in the translocation of small GTPases to membranes and the activation of PMN PLD by AA.

No abstract