practical research 2 conclusion and recommendation

You are using an outdated browser. Upgrade your browser today or install Google Chrome Frame to better experience this site.

Related Resources

• —Reporting and Sharing the Findings

Practical Research I 11 Q2M7 - Drawing Conclusions and Recommendations View Download

Self Learning Module  |  PDF

Curriculum Information

Copyright information, technical information.

Get science-backed answers as you write with Paperpal's Research feature

How to Write a Conclusion for Research Papers (with Examples)

The conclusion of a research paper is a crucial section that plays a significant role in the overall impact and effectiveness of your research paper. However, this is also the section that typically receives less attention compared to the introduction and the body of the paper. The conclusion serves to provide a concise summary of the key findings, their significance, their implications, and a sense of closure to the study. Discussing how can the findings be applied in real-world scenarios or inform policy, practice, or decision-making is especially valuable to practitioners and policymakers. The research paper conclusion also provides researchers with clear insights and valuable information for their own work, which they can then build on and contribute to the advancement of knowledge in the field.

The research paper conclusion should explain the significance of your findings within the broader context of your field. It restates how your results contribute to the existing body of knowledge and whether they confirm or challenge existing theories or hypotheses. Also, by identifying unanswered questions or areas requiring further investigation, your awareness of the broader research landscape can be demonstrated.

Remember to tailor the research paper conclusion to the specific needs and interests of your intended audience, which may include researchers, practitioners, policymakers, or a combination of these.

Table of Contents

What is a conclusion in a research paper, summarizing conclusion, editorial conclusion, externalizing conclusion, importance of a good research paper conclusion, how to write a conclusion for your research paper, research paper conclusion examples.

• How to write a research paper conclusion with Paperpal? 

Frequently Asked Questions

A conclusion in a research paper is the final section where you summarize and wrap up your research, presenting the key findings and insights derived from your study. The research paper conclusion is not the place to introduce new information or data that was not discussed in the main body of the paper. When working on how to conclude a research paper, remember to stick to summarizing and interpreting existing content. The research paper conclusion serves the following purposes: 1

• Warn readers of the possible consequences of not attending to the problem.
• Recommend specific course(s) of action.
• Restate key ideas to drive home the ultimate point of your research paper.
• Provide a “take-home” message that you want the readers to remember about your study.

Types of conclusions for research papers

In research papers, the conclusion provides closure to the reader. The type of research paper conclusion you choose depends on the nature of your study, your goals, and your target audience. I provide you with three common types of conclusions:

A summarizing conclusion is the most common type of conclusion in research papers. It involves summarizing the main points, reiterating the research question, and restating the significance of the findings. This common type of research paper conclusion is used across different disciplines.

An editorial conclusion is less common but can be used in research papers that are focused on proposing or advocating for a particular viewpoint or policy. It involves presenting a strong editorial or opinion based on the research findings and offering recommendations or calls to action.

An externalizing conclusion is a type of conclusion that extends the research beyond the scope of the paper by suggesting potential future research directions or discussing the broader implications of the findings. This type of conclusion is often used in more theoretical or exploratory research papers.

Align your conclusion’s tone with the rest of your research paper. Start Writing with Paperpal Now!  

The conclusion in a research paper serves several important purposes:

• Offers Implications and Recommendations : Your research paper conclusion is an excellent place to discuss the broader implications of your research and suggest potential areas for further study. It’s also an opportunity to offer practical recommendations based on your findings.
• Provides Closure : A good research paper conclusion provides a sense of closure to your paper. It should leave the reader with a feeling that they have reached the end of a well-structured and thought-provoking research project.
• Leaves a Lasting Impression : Writing a well-crafted research paper conclusion leaves a lasting impression on your readers. It’s your final opportunity to leave them with a new idea, a call to action, or a memorable quote.

Writing a strong conclusion for your research paper is essential to leave a lasting impression on your readers. Here’s a step-by-step process to help you create and know what to put in the conclusion of a research paper: 2

• Research Statement : Begin your research paper conclusion by restating your research statement. This reminds the reader of the main point you’ve been trying to prove throughout your paper. Keep it concise and clear.
• Key Points : Summarize the main arguments and key points you’ve made in your paper. Avoid introducing new information in the research paper conclusion. Instead, provide a concise overview of what you’ve discussed in the body of your paper.
• Address the Research Questions : If your research paper is based on specific research questions or hypotheses, briefly address whether you’ve answered them or achieved your research goals. Discuss the significance of your findings in this context.
• Significance : Highlight the importance of your research and its relevance in the broader context. Explain why your findings matter and how they contribute to the existing knowledge in your field.
• Implications : Explore the practical or theoretical implications of your research. How might your findings impact future research, policy, or real-world applications? Consider the “so what?” question.
• Future Research : Offer suggestions for future research in your area. What questions or aspects remain unanswered or warrant further investigation? This shows that your work opens the door for future exploration.
• Closing Thought : Conclude your research paper conclusion with a thought-provoking or memorable statement. This can leave a lasting impression on your readers and wrap up your paper effectively. Avoid introducing new information or arguments here.
• Proofread and Revise : Carefully proofread your conclusion for grammar, spelling, and clarity. Ensure that your ideas flow smoothly and that your conclusion is coherent and well-structured.

Write your research paper conclusion 2x faster with Paperpal. Try it now!

Remember that a well-crafted research paper conclusion is a reflection of the strength of your research and your ability to communicate its significance effectively. It should leave a lasting impression on your readers and tie together all the threads of your paper. Now you know how to start the conclusion of a research paper and what elements to include to make it impactful, let’s look at a research paper conclusion sample.

How to write a research paper conclusion with Paperpal?

A research paper conclusion is not just a summary of your study, but a synthesis of the key findings that ties the research together and places it in a broader context. A research paper conclusion should be concise, typically around one paragraph in length. However, some complex topics may require a longer conclusion to ensure the reader is left with a clear understanding of the study’s significance. Paperpal, an AI writing assistant trusted by over 800,000 academics globally, can help you write a well-structured conclusion for your research paper. 

• Sign Up or Log In: Create a new Paperpal account or login with your details.  
• Navigate to Features : Once logged in, head over to the features’ side navigation pane. Click on Templates and you’ll find a suite of generative AI features to help you write better, faster.  
• Generate an outline: Under Templates, select ‘Outlines’. Choose ‘Research article’ as your document type.  
• Select your section: Since you’re focusing on the conclusion, select this section when prompted.  
• Choose your field of study: Identifying your field of study allows Paperpal to provide more targeted suggestions, ensuring the relevance of your conclusion to your specific area of research. 
• Provide a brief description of your study: Enter details about your research topic and findings. This information helps Paperpal generate a tailored outline that aligns with your paper’s content. 
• Generate the conclusion outline: After entering all necessary details, click on ‘generate’. Paperpal will then create a structured outline for your conclusion, to help you start writing and build upon the outline.  
• Write your conclusion: Use the generated outline to build your conclusion. The outline serves as a guide, ensuring you cover all critical aspects of a strong conclusion, from summarizing key findings to highlighting the research’s implications. 
• Refine and enhance: Paperpal’s ‘Make Academic’ feature can be particularly useful in the final stages. Select any paragraph of your conclusion and use this feature to elevate the academic tone, ensuring your writing is aligned to the academic journal standards. 

By following these steps, Paperpal not only simplifies the process of writing a research paper conclusion but also ensures it is impactful, concise, and aligned with academic standards. Sign up with Paperpal today and write your research paper conclusion 2x faster .  

The research paper conclusion is a crucial part of your paper as it provides the final opportunity to leave a strong impression on your readers. In the research paper conclusion, summarize the main points of your research paper by restating your research statement, highlighting the most important findings, addressing the research questions or objectives, explaining the broader context of the study, discussing the significance of your findings, providing recommendations if applicable, and emphasizing the takeaway message. The main purpose of the conclusion is to remind the reader of the main point or argument of your paper and to provide a clear and concise summary of the key findings and their implications. All these elements should feature on your list of what to put in the conclusion of a research paper to create a strong final statement for your work.

A strong conclusion is a critical component of a research paper, as it provides an opportunity to wrap up your arguments, reiterate your main points, and leave a lasting impression on your readers. Here are the key elements of a strong research paper conclusion: 1. Conciseness : A research paper conclusion should be concise and to the point. It should not introduce new information or ideas that were not discussed in the body of the paper. 2. Summarization : The research paper conclusion should be comprehensive enough to give the reader a clear understanding of the research’s main contributions. 3 . Relevance : Ensure that the information included in the research paper conclusion is directly relevant to the research paper’s main topic and objectives; avoid unnecessary details. 4 . Connection to the Introduction : A well-structured research paper conclusion often revisits the key points made in the introduction and shows how the research has addressed the initial questions or objectives. 5. Emphasis : Highlight the significance and implications of your research. Why is your study important? What are the broader implications or applications of your findings? 6 . Call to Action : Include a call to action or a recommendation for future research or action based on your findings.

The length of a research paper conclusion can vary depending on several factors, including the overall length of the paper, the complexity of the research, and the specific journal requirements. While there is no strict rule for the length of a conclusion, but it’s generally advisable to keep it relatively short. A typical research paper conclusion might be around 5-10% of the paper’s total length. For example, if your paper is 10 pages long, the conclusion might be roughly half a page to one page in length.

In general, you do not need to include citations in the research paper conclusion. Citations are typically reserved for the body of the paper to support your arguments and provide evidence for your claims. However, there may be some exceptions to this rule: 1. If you are drawing a direct quote or paraphrasing a specific source in your research paper conclusion, you should include a citation to give proper credit to the original author. 2. If your conclusion refers to or discusses specific research, data, or sources that are crucial to the overall argument, citations can be included to reinforce your conclusion’s validity.

The conclusion of a research paper serves several important purposes: 1. Summarize the Key Points 2. Reinforce the Main Argument 3. Provide Closure 4. Offer Insights or Implications 5. Engage the Reader. 6. Reflect on Limitations

Remember that the primary purpose of the research paper conclusion is to leave a lasting impression on the reader, reinforcing the key points and providing closure to your research. It’s often the last part of the paper that the reader will see, so it should be strong and well-crafted.

• Makar, G., Foltz, C., Lendner, M., & Vaccaro, A. R. (2018). How to write effective discussion and conclusion sections. Clinical spine surgery, 31(8), 345-346.
• Bunton, D. (2005). The structure of PhD conclusion chapters.  Journal of English for academic purposes ,  4 (3), 207-224.

Paperpal is a comprehensive AI writing toolkit that helps students and researchers achieve 2x the writing in half the time. It leverages 21+ years of STM experience and insights from millions of research articles to provide in-depth academic writing, language editing, and submission readiness support to help you write better, faster.  

Get accurate academic translations, rewriting support, grammar checks, vocabulary suggestions, and generative AI assistance that delivers human precision at machine speed. Try for free or upgrade to Paperpal Prime starting at US$19 a month to access premium features, including consistency, plagiarism, and 30+ submission readiness checks to help you succeed.  

Experience the future of academic writing – Sign up to Paperpal and start writing for free!  

Related Reads:

• 5 Reasons for Rejection After Peer Review
• Ethical Research Practices For Research with Human Subjects

7 Ways to Improve Your Academic Writing Process

• Paraphrasing in Academic Writing: Answering Top Author Queries

Preflight For Editorial Desk: The Perfect Hybrid (AI + Human) Assistance Against Compromised Manuscripts

You may also like, mla works cited page: format, template & examples, how to write a high-quality conference paper, academic editing: how to self-edit academic text with..., measuring academic success: definition & strategies for excellence, phd qualifying exam: tips for success , ai in education: it’s time to change the..., is it ethical to use ai-generated abstracts without..., what are journal guidelines on using generative ai..., quillbot review: features, pricing, and free alternatives, what is an academic paper types and elements .

• No category

PracResearch2 Grade-12 Q2 Mod3 Research-Conclusions-and-Recommendations CO-Version-2

Related documents

Add this document to collection(s)

You can add this document to your study collection(s)

Add this document to saved

You can add this document to your saved list

Suggest us how to improve StudyLib

(For complaints, use another form )

Input it if you want to receive answer

This paper is in the following e-collection/theme issue:

Published on 29.5.2024 in Vol 26 (2024)

Experiences of Electronic Health Records’ and Client Information Systems’ Use on a Mobile Device and Factors Associated With Work Time Savings Among Practical Nurses: Cross-Sectional Study

Authors of this article:

Original Paper

• Satu Paatela 1 , MHSc   ; 
• Maiju Kyytsönen 1 , MHSc   ; 
• Kaija Saranto 2 , PhD   ; 
• Ulla-Mari Kinnunen 3 , PhD   ; 
• Tuulikki Vehko 1 , PhD  

1 Health and Social Service System Research, Finnish Institute for Health and Welfare, Helsinki, Finland

2 Faculty of Social Sciences and Business Studies, University of Eastern Finland, Kuopio, Finland

3 Department of Health and Social Management, University of Eastern Finland, Kuopio, Finland

Corresponding Author:

Satu Paatela, MHSc

Health and Social Service System Research

Finnish Institute for Health and Welfare

Mannerheimintie 166

Helsinki, 00271

Phone: 358 29 524 77 22

Email: [email protected]

Background: The transmission of clinical information in nursing predominantly occurs through digital solutions, such as computers and mobile devices, in today’s era. Various technological systems, including electronic health records (EHRs) and client information systems (CISs), can be seamlessly integrated with mobile devices. The use of mobile devices is anticipated to rise, particularly as long-term care is increasingly delivered in environments such as clients’ homes, where computers are not readily accessible. However, there is a growing need for more user-centered data to ensure that mobile devices effectively support practical nurses in their daily activities.

Objective: This study aims to analyze practical nurses’ experiences of using EHRs or CISs on a mobile device in their daily practice. In addition, it aims to examine the factors associated with work time savings when using EHRs/CISs on a mobile device.

Methods: A cross-sectional study using an electronic survey was conducted in spring 2022. A total of 3866 practical nurses participated in the survey based on self-assessment. The sample was limited to practical nurses who used EHRs or CISs on a mobile device and worked in home care or service housing within the social welfare or health care sector (n=1014). Logistic regression analysis was used to explore the factors associated with work time savings.

Results: The likelihood of perceiving work time savings was higher among more experienced EHR/CIS users compared with those with less experience (odds ratio [OR] 1.59, 95% CI 1.30-1.94). Participants with 0-5 years of work experience were more likely to experience work time savings compared with those who had worked 21 years or more (OR 2.41, 95% CI 1.43-4.07). Practical nurses in home care were also more likely to experience work time savings compared with those working in service housing (OR 1.95, 95% CI 1.23-3.07). A lower grade given for EHRs/CISs was associated with a reduced likelihood of experiencing work time savings (OR 0.76, 95% CI 0.66-0.89). Participants who documented client data in a public area were more likely to experience work time savings compared with those who did so in the nurses’ office (OR 2.33, 95% CI 1.27-4.25). Practical nurses who found documentation of client data on a mobile device easy (OR 3.05, 95% CI 2.14-4.34) were more likely to experience work time savings compared with those who did not. Similarly, participants who believed that documentation of client data on a mobile device reduced the need to memorize things (OR 4.10, 95% CI 2.80-6.00) were more likely to experience work time savings compared with those who did not.

Conclusions: To enhance the proportion of practical nurses experiencing work time savings, we recommend that organizations offer comprehensive orientation and regular education sessions tailored for mobile device users who have less experience using EHRs or CISs and find mobile devices less intuitive to use.

Introduction

Information and communication technology (ICT) including electronic health records (EHRs) and client information systems (CISs) have become an increasingly important part of health care and social services in Finland [ 1 - 4 ]. In fact, EHR has been a common tool in Finnish health care for a long time, and from 2010 onward EHR availability has been 100% in public and private facilities [ 5 ]. EHRs include a comprehensive collection of patient health information (eg, narrative texts and laboratory data), with the collected data used in the care processes of the patient [ 6 ]. By contrast, CISs are more commonly used in the public social welfare sector for accessing, storing, and using client information and documents [ 3 , 4 ]. The Finnish Ministry of Social Affairs and Health has been at the helm of guiding the development of technological infrastructure and associated legislative efforts over the decades. Their eHealth and eWelfare strategy aims to improve the effective utilization of data in bolstering service renewal and citizen well-being at a national level [ 7 ].

With the development of the ICT infrastructure, the clinical information in nursing is nowadays mainly transmitted via digital solutions such as computers and mobile devices [ 8 ]. Particularly, mobile devices such as smartphones and tablets are commonly used in the health care sector [ 9 , 10 ], and nurses are known to use EHRs on mobile devices 3 times more often compared with doctors in a hospital environment [ 11 ]. Different technological systems such as EHRs can be integrated with mobile devices [ 9 , 11 - 13 ], and this allows social and health care professionals to document client data and exchange information related to the clients and service assignments in the system regardless of the time and location [ 11 , 13 ]. Thus, the ability to receive nursing information via a mobile device can promote the mobility and portability of care and enhance service flexibility [ 9 , 12 ].

In previous studies, nurses have been reported to perceive mobile devices as beneficial in their daily practice [ 14 , 15 ]. Mobile device use has been found to support nurses’ workflow processes [ 11 , 16 - 18 ] as they need to spend less time on clinical documentation [ 17 ]. In fact, it is important to recognize that the use of different technological systems such as EHRs has been shown to provide nurses with more time for direct patient care and interprofessional communication [ 19 ]. Moreover, mobile devices have been reported to be useful for planning work, handling notes [ 14 ], and saving time for nurses [ 14 , 20 , 21 ]. Mobile devices may also reduce duplicate documentation [ 13 ] and potential documentation errors [ 17 , 20 ] because client data can be documented at the time of its occurrence. In addition, improved decision-making is one of the main advantages [ 9 , 20 ]. Mobile devices continuously provide the latest information on the situation of the clients, which can improve safety and the quality of care [ 14 , 18 ]. For instance, in home care settings, workers can review and plan real-time nursing interventions and tasks in the clients’ home environment [ 13 , 16 ] because the daily assignments can be seen directly on the mobile device. The use of mobile devices can also contribute to client empowerment as nurses have easier access to clinical information and they can reply to clients’ questions more readily [ 17 ].

By contrast, some challenges have emerged related to the use of EHRs/CISs on a mobile device. According to a recent study, the use of EHRs on a mobile device can negatively affect nurses’ well-being because the use of mobile devices may increase time pressure and stress at work as a result of functional problems and changing information systems [ 10 ]. In home care settings, challenges have emerged, particularly concerning technical issues such as usability problems. This is because the information systems used on mobile devices are not always tailored to address the specific requirements of various working environments [ 22 ]. This in turn may lead to reduced workflows [ 22 ]. Additionally, there is a possibility of poor signal connectivity [ 18 ] and increased data security threats [ 17 , 18 , 23 ] when using mobile devices. Furthermore, some of the recent studies have observed that the use of EHRs itself may negatively impact the quality of communication between nurses and patients because nurses’ attention is more focused on documentation tools such as computers rather than on the patient [ 24 , 25 ]. More generally, the lack of digital competence can affect how different digital tools are adopted in practice [ 26 , 27 ].

The European Union has promoted digitalization in society, including public services, with political consensus through the Digital Decade policy program [ 28 ]. The change in the demographic structure especially forces social and health care services to invest even more in technological solutions [ 29 ] such as mobile documentation [ 22 ]. An aging population increases the need to provide long-term care in home environments [ 30 ], and therefore, using EHRs and CISs on a mobile device is expected to grow as computers for professionals are rarely available at the patients’ bedside in the home environment [ 14 ]. In the Finnish context, practical nurses often take care of needs related to the activities of daily living, for instance, in home care and service housing. Practical nurses in the social and health care profession are strictly regulated by law in Finland [ 31 , 32 ]. Practical nurses are required to have successfully obtained the Vocational Qualification in Social and Healthcare, which entails accruing 180 competence points [ 33 ]. Qualified practical nurses are registered with the National Supervisory Authority for Welfare and Health. They are employed across a diverse spectrum of careers within the social welfare and health care sectors, as well as in early childhood education and schools [ 34 ]. Practical nurses are the second largest occupational group in Finland and the largest group in the social welfare and health care sectors in Finland, with 79,800 people working as practical nurses at the end of 2020 [ 35 ].

As practical nurses form an important group of professionals, it is justified to study their ways of working and increase our knowledge about their experiences of EHR and CIS use on mobile devices. Some of the previous studies have investigated the use of mobile devices from the perspectives of registered nurses, nursing students, and doctors [ 10 , 11 , 14 , 15 ], but there is still limited understanding of the experiences of practical nurses. More user-centered data are needed to ensure that mobile devices fit into the changing clinical practice [ 18 ] and to improve health professionals’ workflows in those work environments where mobile devices are commonly used. As patient care becomes increasingly complex [ 8 ] and health professionals are constantly required to work more efficiently [ 36 ], it is important to study whether mobile devices are as effective tools as they are expected to be in the daily activities of practical nurses [ 9 , 11 , 13 , 14 , 16 , 17 ].

Consequently, the aim of this study was to analyze practical nurses’ experiences regarding their use of EHRs/CISs on a mobile device in their daily practice in home care and service housing settings in the social welfare and health care sectors. Furthermore, we examined the potential factors associated with work time savings when practical nurses were using EHRs/CISs on a mobile device.

Study Context

Finland is a Nordic welfare state where all citizens have universal access to health care and social welfare services. In the 2000s, long-term care for older people and persons with disabilities in Finland has changed from institutional care to more individualized services [ 37 ]. In Finland, long-term care is increasingly provided in service housing or in the home environment under social services. Service housing is available for those citizens who need support living independently. These facilities offer a range of services including meal provision, assistance with personal hygiene, and various health care services [ 38 ]. However, most older adults continue to reside in their own homes, where they can access home care services if needed. Home care encompasses health center–based home nursing and home help services [ 37 , 38 ]. Finland has a wide array of EHRs and CISs, which are used across both the health care and social welfare sectors [ 6 ].

Study Design and Sample

This was a cross-sectional study based on an electronic survey. Data were collected in the spring of 2022 over a 3-week period using a convenience sampling method. As of the end of 2020, there were 79,800 practical nurses employed in Finland [ 35 ], working across the social welfare and health care sectors, as well as in schools and early childhood education and care. Potential respondents were invited to participate in the survey through an email sent by 2 trade unions: The Finnish Union of Practical Nurses and The Union of Public and Welfare Sectors. The electronic survey was distributed to 54,030 members of the trade unions aged 18-65 years. The cover letter specified the study theme as the use of EHRs and CISs. However, previous studies indicate that not all members of the trade unions use EHRs/CISs in their daily practice. This is because practical nurses in social services may still rely on alternative solutions for documentation [ 6 ]. Despite this, 2 reminders were sent to potential participants. Ultimately, 3866 practical nurses responded to the survey, yielding a response rate of 7.16%.

In this study, the inclusion criteria for participation were 2-fold: (1) respondents must work as practical nurses and use an EHR or CIS, and (2) they must not be employed in school or early childhood education and care settings. These criteria were outlined in the first 2 questions of the survey, and the survey was closed for potential respondents who did not meet these criteria. The analysis was additionally narrowed down to practical nurses who indicated that they use EHRs or CISs on a mobile device and are employed in either home care or service housing settings (n=1014). Respondents working in other employment settings were excluded because of the limited number of mobile device users in those settings.

The experiences of EHR systems among physicians were initially assessed in Finland through a national survey in 2010 [ 39 , 40 ]. Subsequently, the survey was refined and conducted again in 2014, 2017, and 2021 for physicians. Additionally, it was customized for registered nurses in 2017 [ 41 - 43 ] and for social care professionals (educated at a university or a university of applied sciences) in 2020 [ 44 , 45 ]. Since 2014, these national surveys have been carried out as part of the “Monitoring and Assessment of Social Welfare and Health Care Information System Services” (STePS) projects [ 6 ]. In a significant development, for the first time in 2022, the survey was customized and conducted for practical nurses as well. Before data collection, the survey underwent pretesting with 20 practical nurses. Questions regarding the use of EHRs and CISs on mobile devices were particularly emphasized, given their integral role in the workflow of many practical nurses. As a result, this study specifically centered on the utilization of a mobile device for the documentation of client data.

A total of 11 variables from the survey were covered in this study. The “Documentation of client data on a mobile device saves working time” variable was used as an outcome measure. To understand what kind of factors are connected to work time savings, the following variables were used: “Age,” “Work experience,” “Workplace,” “Experience in using EHR/CIS,” “Grade for EHR/CIS,” “Most common place to document client data on a mobile device,” “Received sufficient training to document client data on a mobile device,” “Documentation of client data on a mobile device is easy,” “Documentation of client data on a mobile device reduces the need to memorize,” and “I can document everything I need on a mobile device.” A total of 9 variables were recoded in the analysis and 2 variables were included as a continuous variable. The 5-point Likert scale was specified in 5 different variables as follows: 1=fully agree, 2=agree, 3=neither agree nor disagree, 4=disagree, and 5=fully disagree. To streamline the focus on the phenomena of interest and to ensure an adequate number of respondents in all categories, the response options were recoded as follows: 1 or 2=yes and 3-5=no. The included variables are presented in Table 1 .

a EHR: electronic health record.

b CIS: client information system.

c The 5-point Likert scale was specified as follows: 1=fully agree, 2=agree, 3=neither agree nor disagree, 4=disagree, and 5=fully disagree.

Data Analysis

The data were analyzed using the statistical software SPSS Statistics version 29.0.0.0 (IBM, Inc.). The characteristics of the study participants were described using n (%). A binary logistic regression analysis was conducted to examine the association between independent and dependent variables. The “Documentation of client data on a mobile device saves working time” item was used as a dependent variable and 10 items were used as independent variables in the analysis. In establishing a model for the relationship between independent and dependent variables, we first tested the significance of each independent variable individually according to the Wald F test. Based on the P values ( P <.05) of the Wald F test, the items “Age” and “I can document everything I need on a mobile device” were excluded from the regression analysis model. We included 8 other independent variables one by one in the model using a forward stepwise selection method. At each step, variables were chosen for the final model according to their effect on the model’s goodness-of-fit measure, Nagelkerke R 2 ( R 2 N ), and P values of the Wald F test. The fully adjusted model included 7 independent variables, including “Experience in using EHR/CIS,” “Work experience,” “Workplace,” “Grade for EHR/CIS,” “Most common place to document client data on a mobile device,” “Documentation of client data on a mobile device is easy,” and “Documentation of client data on a mobile device reduces the need to memorize.” The “Received sufficient training to document client data on a mobile device” item was omitted from the final model because it was no longer statistically significant ( P =.08) after adjusting the final variable to the model. The fully adjusted model’s R 2 N was 0.372. Variance inflation factor was used to secure a model without multicollinearity: the values indicated low correlation, which is acceptable in a regression model. The results of the fully adjusted regression analysis model are presented with P values, variance inflation factor, odds ratios, and their 95% CIs in Table 4 .

Ethical Considerations

We considered ethical issues related to different phases of this study. Ethical approval for the study was provided by the Finnish Institute for Health and Welfare THL/1206/6.02.01/2022. Study participants were offered written information on the research and data processing in a cover letter and privacy notice [ 46 ]. Participants did not receive any compensation for their participation in the study. The research group has been committed to protecting the anonymity of the participants throughout the study process.

Characteristics of the Mobile Device Users

Of the total of 1014 practical nurses who used EHRs or CISs on a mobile device, nearly one-half (471/1014, 46.45%) fell within the age range of 35-54 years. Additionally, there was a relatively high proportion of participants who were at least 55 years old. The work experience among participants was diverse and evenly distributed. For example, a portion of practical nurses (195/1014, 19.23%) had 0-5 years of experience as a practical nurse or equivalent, while others had worked for 21 years or more (238/1014, 23.47%). The majority of mobile device users (706/1014, 69.63%) were employed in home care, with the remainder working in service housing. Nearly half of the mobile device users (458/1014, 45.17%) rated their experience of using EHRs or CISs at level 4 (on a scale of 1 to 5, where 1 represents a beginner and 5 represents highly experienced). Only 4 practical nurses rated themselves as beginners in using EHRs/CISs. Additionally, the majority of practical nurses assessed the EHR/CIS system used via a mobile device as good (364/1014, 35.90%) or satisfactory (271/1014, 26.73%; Table 2 ).

Practical Nurses’ Experiences of Documenting Client Data on a Mobile Device

The most prevalent location for documenting client data on a mobile device was next to the client (537/1014, 52.96%). Some practical nurses also documented client data in alternative settings such as in the car, at the office, or in public areas. Overall, mobile device users expressed relatively high satisfaction with the training they received for documenting client data on a mobile device (661/1014, 65.19%). The majority of mobile device users (648/1014, 63.91%) found it easy to document client data on a mobile device. Additionally, two-thirds of practical nurses (667/1014, 65.78%) reported that documenting client data on a mobile device saved them time. Furthermore, a vast majority of mobile device users (785/1014, 77.42%) agreed that documenting client data on a mobile device reduced the need to rely on memory. Less than one-half of the participants (418/1014, 41.22%) agreed that they could document everything they need on a mobile device ( Table 3 ).

Factors Associated With Work Time Savings When Using EHRs/CISs on a Mobile Device

Several factors were associated with work time savings when using EHRs/CISs on a mobile device ( Table 4 ). Experience of using EHRs/CISs ( P <.001), work experience ( P <.001), the workplace ( P =.004), the grade given for the EHRs/CISs ( P <.001), the statements “Documentation of patient data on a mobile device is easy” ( P <.001) and “Documentation of patient data on a mobile device reduces the need to memorize things” ( P <.001) had statistically significant associations with work time savings.

c The level of statistical significance was set at P <.05 (italicized).

d Comparison group.

e Not applicable.

Practical nurses who considered themselves to be more experienced EHR/CIS users were more likely to perceive work time savings. Participants who had worked 0-5 years as a practical nurse were 2.41 times more likely to experience work time savings compared with those who had worked 21 years or more. Practical nurses who had worked 16-20 years had a lower likelihood of experiencing work time savings than those who had worked for 21 years or more. Furthermore, practical nurses who worked in home care settings were 1.95 times more likely to report work time savings compared with those participants who worked in service housing. Giving a lower grade for EHRs/CISs was associated with a lower likelihood of experiencing work time savings. Participants who documented client data in a public area were 2.33 times more likely to experience work time savings compared with those who documented client data at the (nurses’) office. Moreover, those practical nurses who reported that the documentation of client data on a mobile device was easy were 3.05 times more likely to experience work time savings compared with others. Practical nurses who reported that the documentation of client data on a mobile device reduced their need to memorize things were 4.10 times more likely to experience work time savings compared with those who did not find mobile devices helpful in memorizing things.

Principal Findings

The aim of the study was to analyze practical nurses’ experiences of using EHRs/CISs on a mobile device in their daily practice. Our study findings indicate that practical nurses generally had positive experiences when documenting client data on a mobile device. Two-thirds of the participants perceived mobile devices as effective tools in their daily practice, as they facilitated time savings in their work. The study revealed that a vast majority of the participants agreed that using EHRs/CISs on a mobile device reduced the need to memorize things. However, participants were less inclined to agree with the statement that they could document everything they needed on a mobile device.

Additionally, our study examined factors associated with work time savings when practical nurses used EHRs/CISs on a mobile device. Factors such as experience with the EHRs/CISs, work experience, workplace, the grade awarded for the EHRs/CISs, and responses to statements such as “Documentation of patient data on a mobile device is easy” and “Documentation of patient data on a mobile device reduces the need to memorize things” were all found to be associated with practical nurses’ experiences of work time savings.

Limitations

This study has several limitations. First, the response rate of 7.16% (3866/54,030) was relatively low, which is common for web-based and lengthy surveys [ 47 ], especially those aimed at health care professionals [ 48 ]. Additionally, incorrect email addresses due to job changes or other reasons, as well as nonopened survey emails, may have further contributed to the low response rate. Therefore, the actual response rate might have been higher if calculated only for those who received and opened the survey invitation. Eventually, 3866/4533 (85.29%) survey clicks resulted in respondents completing the survey. However, it is worth noting that data collection occurred during a national industrial action organized by the trade unions, which could have complicated survey participation. Additionally, various work-related factors that practical nurses encounter in their daily routines, such as time constraints and interruptions, may have influenced survey response rates, especially considering that many union members use their work email as their contact information. Furthermore, the utilization of the convenience sampling method may restrict the generalizability of the results. However, the age distribution of the respondents mirrored that of individuals affiliated with national trade unions [ 49 ]. Additionally, the survey was available in both of Finland’s official languages, Finnish and Swedish, potentially encouraging speakers of both languages to participate.

Second, while practical nurses are a common occupational group in Finland, their title may be less recognized in other regions worldwide. Indeed, long-term care may be provided by health care professionals with various occupational titles internationally. Nonetheless, we propose that the findings of our study can be applied to other nursing professions, such as registered nurses and health care assistants, who use mobile devices as documentation tools in their daily practice. Furthermore, it is important to acknowledge that Finland has a long-standing history of extensively using ICT tools in health care [ 5 ]. Moreover, Finland ranks among the global leaders in mobile data usage [ 50 ]. Consequently, the findings of this study may be particularly relevant and applicable to countries with similar levels of ICT development.

Third, the survey was customized for practical nurses in Finland for the first time, including the questions related to mobile device use. Given the low proportion of missing data, we can assume that respondents understood the various items of the instrument relatively well. Before distribution to participants, the instrument underwent pretesting with 20 practical nurses.

In future studies, it would be beneficial to investigate work time savings among users of specific EHR/CIS brands, as the grading of the system by respondents was strongly correlated with experiencing work time savings. Additionally, research should explore specific work environments, such as home care and service housing. Hence, conducting a subgroup analysis separately for practical nurses working in home care and service housing would be a valuable addition to future studies. Another important research avenue would be to explore the barriers that practical nurses may encounter when documenting next to the patient using a mobile device.

Comparison With Prior Work

To the best of our knowledge, this study marks the inaugural exploration of practical nurses’ experiences regarding their use of EHRs/CISs on a mobile device. Our primary focus was to investigate whether the use of EHRs/CISs on a mobile device contributes to time savings for practical nurses, as well as to identify the factors associated with such savings. In the health care sector, saving work time is crucial because nursing professionals are tasked with a multitude of responsibilities in their daily practice. It is essential for them to have more time available for direct patient care and to minimize the time spent on indirect patient care activities, such as documentation [ 21 ].

This study revealed that two-thirds of practical nurses working in home care or service housing experienced work time savings when using EHRs/CISs on a mobile device. Comparable findings of work time savings have also been documented in previous studies involving health care professionals [ 14 , 20 , 21 ]. This study revealed that documenting client data in a public area, such as a corridor in a housing service, was over 2 times more likely to result in work time savings compared with documenting at the nurses’ office, where computers are typically available. However, it is important to note that documenting sensitive client data on mobile devices in a public area may pose increased security risks, such as the potential loss or theft of the mobile device [ 23 ]. Therefore, mobile technology tools should incorporate essential security features, and organizations should establish clear policies regarding the management of mobile devices [ 51 ].

According to our study findings, work experience was linked to work time savings when using EHRs/CISs on a mobile device. Participants who had worked 0-5 years as practical nurses or in equivalent roles were over 2 times more likely to experience work time savings compared with those who had worked for over 21 years. We speculate that practical nurses with less work experience may perceive work time savings more frequently because they are accustomed to working with new technologies in their daily practice, and they may have received more recent orientation on using mobile devices. It is interesting to note that, in our analysis, age was not found to be significantly associated with work time savings when using EHRs/CISs on a mobile device. However, age may influence perceptions regarding the use of mobile devices. Findings from a previous study [ 52 ] have suggested that older nurses are less inclined to use smartphones or acknowledge their benefits in acute care settings.

Additionally, our study revealed that practical nurses working in home care settings were nearly two times as likely to report work time savings compared with those working in service housing. This finding is unsurprising, considering that home care relies on mobility and necessitates the use of ICT tools directly at patients’ homes [ 22 ]. This environment naturally fosters the integration of mobile technology into the daily practices of health care workers. An essential prerequisite for realizing the benefits of mobile technology is seamless integration with the existing information systems [ 18 ], such as EHRs/CISs. It could be hypothesized that mobile devices contribute to work time savings for practical nurses, especially in home care settings, by facilitating the documentation of client data immediately after completing daily tasks [ 13 ], such as next to the client. However, although practical nurses in this study often documented data next to the client, it was not identified as a statistically significant factor for work time savings. The immediacy afforded by mobile devices, allowing users to document client data promptly after interacting with the client, can alleviate the burden of memorization for health care professionals. According to our study findings, practical nurses who perceived that the documentation of client data reduced the need to rely on memory were 4 times more likely to report work time savings compared with those who did not find mobile devices helpful in reducing the need to memorize things.

Our study findings revealed that practical nurses who found the documentation of client data on a mobile device to be easy were over 3 times more likely to experience work time savings compared with those who did not find mobile devices easy to use. Furthermore, Zhang et al [ 53 ] discovered that nursing professionals in home care settings perceived mobile devices to be useful if the tools are easy to use. Overall, while usability issues related to health information systems, including EHRs, are widely recognized [ 2 , 54 ], much of the existing data are centered around the use of these systems on computers. However, it is important to note that using EHRs/CISs specifically on mobile devices may present additional challenges for social and health care professionals. For example, previous studies have indicated that mobile devices may be difficult to use, too small for daily practice [ 16 ], may not function properly at all times [ 13 ], and could be unstable due to potential internet connection problems [ 18 , 22 ].

In this study, the grade provided by respondents for the EHRs/CISs on a mobile device emerged as a factor associated with work time savings. Specifically, a lower grade for the EHRs/CISs was linked to a reduced likelihood of experiencing work time savings. As the grade for the EHRs/CISs may reflect user satisfaction to some extent, this finding underscores the significance of prioritizing user satisfaction regarding practical nurses’ use of EHRs/CISs on mobile devices. User satisfaction has indeed garnered significant attention in previous studies [ 9 , 15 ], and its impact extends beyond work time savings. According to Hsiao and Chen [ 9 ], user satisfaction influences nurses’ intention to continue using information systems on mobile devices, and perceived usefulness is often intertwined with user satisfaction. Furthermore, the quality of the information system and support from managers have been identified as significant predictors of user satisfaction [ 15 ], as well as technology adoption in general [ 18 ]. It is important to highlight that health care professionals who are more experienced users of information systems may offer valuable suggestions for improvements [ 9 ], underscoring the importance of involving these users in the development of EHRs/CISs to ensure user satisfaction with the system interfaces.

When assessing potential work time savings, it is crucial to take into account practical nurses’ experiences with using EHRs/CISs. Our study results indicate that practical nurses with more experience in using EHRs/CISs were more likely to experience work time savings. Similarly, Villalba-Mora et al [ 26 ] discovered that health care professionals who frequently used health information technologies such as EHRs perceived these tools to be more useful. Additionally, previous experience with digital technologies is significant, as it aids health care professionals in integrating mobile devices into their daily practices [ 18 ].

Conclusions

This study contributes to the existing literature on the use of EHRs/CISs on a mobile device by practical nurses in their daily practice, as well as factors associated with work time savings. Our findings indicate that two-thirds of practical nurses perceived mobile devices as beneficial in home care and service housing settings, as they reported that documenting client data on a mobile device saved their working time. Experience in using EHRs/CISs, work experience, workplace, grade given for the EHRs/CISs, and perceptions regarding the ease of documentation and reduction in the need to memorize were all significantly associated with practical nurses’ experiences of work time savings. Based on our findings, we recommend that special attention should be directed toward mobile device users who are less experienced in using EHRs/CISs or do not find mobile devices easy to use. Organizations should provide comprehensive orientation and regular education to health care professionals on the use of EHRs/CISs on mobile devices. Additionally, user satisfaction is a crucial aspect to consider in achieving work time savings among health care professionals who use EHRs/CISs on a mobile device, as demonstrated by our findings. Practical nurses who rated their EHRs/CISs more favorably were more likely to experience work time savings. Therefore, we suggest that end users, particularly those with more experience in using EHRs/CISs, should be involved in the development of EHRs/CISs to ensure better user satisfaction of system interfaces.

Acknowledgments

The research leading to these results received funding from the Ministry of Social Affairs and Health, Finland. The authors thank the Finnish Federation of Local and Basic Caregivers (SuPer ry) and the Union of Public and Welfare Sectors (JHL) for sending the survey to their members and all the licensed practical nurses who responded to the survey. We also thank researcher Samuel Salovaara for commenting on the survey questionnaire. This study was supported by the Ministry of Social Affairs and Health, Finland (project 414919001). The funder’ did not have any role in the study design, collection, analysis, interpretation of data, or writing of the report.

Data Availability

The data collected and analyzed during this study are not publicly available due to coregistratorship between the University of Eastern Finland and the Finnish Institute for Health and Welfare, the controllers of the data.

Conflicts of Interest

None declared.

• Kinnunen U, Heponiemi T, Rajalahti E, Ahonen O, Korhonen T, Hyppönen H. Factors related to health informatics competencies for nurses—results of a national electronic health record survey. CIN: Computers, Informatics, Nursing. 2019;37(8):420-429. [ CrossRef ]
• Kaihlanen A, Gluschkoff K, Hyppönen H, Kaipio J, Puttonen S, Vehko T, et al. The associations of electronic health record usability and user age with stress and cognitive failures among Finnish registered nurses: cross-sectional study. JMIR Med Inform. Nov 18, 2020;8(11):e23623. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Salovaara S, Ylönen K. Client information systems’ support for case-based social work: experiences of Finnish social workers. Nordic Social Work Research. Nov 10, 2021;12(3):364-378. [ CrossRef ]
• Ylönen K. The use of electronic information systems in social work. A scoping review of the empirical articles published between 2000 and 2019. European Journal of Social Work. Apr 18, 2022:1-14. [ CrossRef ]
• Reponen J, Keränen N, Ruotanen R, Tuovinen T, Haverinen J, Kangas M. Availability and use of e-health in Finland. In: Vehko T, editor. E-Health and E-Welfare of Finland: Checkpoint 2022. Helsinki, Finland. National Institute for Health and Welfare; 2022:61-95.
• Vehko T, editor. E-Health and E-Welfare of Finland : Check Point 2022 [Report 2022_006]. Helsinki, Finland. National Institute for Health and Welfare; 2022.
• Jormanainen V, Hämäläinen P, Reponen J. The Finnish healthcare and social care system and ICT-policies. In: Vehko T, editor. E-Health and E-Welfare of Finland: Checkpoint 2022. Helsinki, Finland. National Institute for Health and Welfare; 2022:61-95.
• Silva AMDA, Mascarenhas VHA, Araújo SNM, Machado RDS, Santos AMRD, Andrade EMLR. Mobile technologies in the nursing area. Rev Bras Enferm. Oct 2018;71(5):2570-2578. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Hsiao J, Chen R. Understanding determinants of health care professionals’ perspectives on mobile health continuance and performance. JMIR Med Inform. Mar 18, 2019;7(1):e12350. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Heponiemi T, Kaihlanen A, Gluschkoff K, Saranto K, Nissinen S, Laukka E, et al. The association between using a mobile version of an electronic health record and the well-being of nurses: cross-sectional survey study. JMIR Med Inform. Jul 06, 2021;9(7):e28729. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Lee Y, Park YR, Kim J, Kim JH, Kim WS, Lee J. Usage pattern differences and similarities of mobile electronic medical records among health care providers. JMIR Mhealth Uhealth. Dec 13, 2017;5(12):e178. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Lin T. Mobile nursing information system utilization: the task-technology fit perspective. CIN:Computers, Informatics, Nursing. 2014;32(3):129-137. [ CrossRef ]
• Han S, Juell-Skielse G, Smedberg, Aasi P, Nilsson AG. Benefits of mobile reporting systems in social home care: the case of seven Swedish municipalities. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. Oct 2014;30(4):409-415. [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Johansson P, Petersson G, Saveman B, Nilsson G. Using advanced mobile devices in nursing practice--the views of nurses and nursing students. Health Informatics J. Sep 02, 2014;20(3):220-231. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Cheng C, Chan C, Chen L, Guo S. Evaluation of the implementation of a mobile nursing information system. Online Journal of Nursing Informatics. 2019;23(3):1. [ FREE Full text ]
• Schachner M, Sommer J, González Z, Luna D, Benítez S. Evaluating the feasibility of using mobile devices for nurse documentation. Nursing Informatics. 2016;225:495-499. [ CrossRef ]
• Ehrler F, Lovis C, Blondon K. A mobile phone app for bedside nursing care: design and development using an adapted software development life cycle model. JMIR Mhealth Uhealth. Apr 11, 2019;7(4):e12551. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Jacob C, Sanchez-Vazquez A, Ivory C. Social, organizational, and technological factors impacting clinicians' adoption of mobile health tools: systematic literature review. JMIR Mhealth Uhealth. Feb 20, 2020;8(2):e15935. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Moore E, Tolley C, Bates D, Slight S. A systematic review of the impact of health information technology on nurses' time. J Am Med Inform Assoc. May 01, 2020;27(5):798-807. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Mickan S, Tilson JK, Atherton H, Roberts NW, Heneghan C. Evidence of effectiveness of health care professionals using handheld computers: a scoping review of systematic reviews. J Med Internet Res. Oct 28, 2013;15(10):e212. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Pérez-Martí M, Casadó-Marín LC, Guillén-Villar A. Electronic records with tablets at the point of care in an internal medicine unit. Online Journal of Nursing Informatics. 2020;24(3):e30512. [ FREE Full text ]
• Rydenfält C, Persson J, Erlingsdottir G, Johansson G. eHealth services in the near and distant future in Swedish home care nursing. Comput Inform Nurs. Jul 2019;37(7):366-372. [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Vossebeld DM, Puik ECN, Jaspers JEN, Schuurmans MJ. Development process of a mobile electronic medical record for nurses: a single case study. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. Jan 14, 2019;19(1):11. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Forde-Johnston C, Butcher D, Aveyard H. An integrative review exploring the impact of electronic health records (EHR) on the quality of nurse-patient interactions and communication. J Adv Nurs. Jan 07, 2023;79(1):48-67. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Ali S, Kleib M, Paul P, Petrovskaya O, Kennedy M. Compassionate nursing care and the use of digital health technologies: a scoping review. Int J Nurs Stud. Mar 2022;127:104161. [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Villalba-Mora E, Casas I, Lupiañez-Villanueva F, Maghiros I. Adoption of health information technologies by physicians for clinical practice: the Andalusian case. Int J Med Inform. Jul 2015;84(7):477-485. [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Zhu H, Andersen ST. Digital competence in social work practice and education: experiences from Norway. Nordic Social Work Research. Mar 17, 2021;12(5):823-838. [ CrossRef ]
• European Commission. Shaping Europe's digital future. European Commission. 2021. URL: https://ec.europa.eu/digital-single-market/en/content/european-digital-strategy[accessed [accessed 2023-01-12]
• Dequanter S, Steenhout I, Fobelets M, Gagnon M, Sasseville M, Bourbonnais A, et al. Technology implementation in care practices for community-dwelling older adults with mild cognitive decline: Perspectives of professional caregivers in Quebec and Brussels. Digit Health. Nov 16, 2022;8:20552076221139693. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Fritzell J, Agahi N, Jylhä M, Rostgaard T. Social inequalities in ageing in the Nordic countries. Eur J Ageing. Jun 11, 2022;19(2):155-159. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Act on health care professionals 559/1994. Finlex. URL: https://www.finlex.fi/en/laki/kaannokset/1994/en19940559 [accessed 2023-01-21]
• Degree on health care professionals 564/1994. Finlex. URL: https://www.finlex.fi/en/laki/kaannokset/1994/en19940564 [accessed 2023-01-20]
• Vocational qualification in social and health care. Finnish National Agency for Education. 2022. URL: https://eperusteet.opintopolku.fi/#/en/ammatillinen/7854765/tiedot [accessed 2022-12-20]
• The Finnish Union of Practical Nurses. Practical nurse training. Practical nurse's education, training and registration. The Finnish Union of Practical Nurses. 2022. URL: https://www.superliitto.fi/in-english/practical-nurse-training/ [accessed 2022-12-20]
• Statistics Finland. Shop sales assistants, health care assistants and nurses most common occupations in 2020. Statistics Finland. URL: https://www.stat.fi/en/publication/cktws35s04dru0b553lzi7aci [accessed 2022-12-15]
• Lee T, Sun G, Kou L, Yeh M. The use of information technology to enhance patient safety and nursing efficiency. THC. Oct 23, 2017;25(5):917-928. [ CrossRef ]
• Keskimaki I, Tynkkynen L, Reissell E, Koivusalo M, Syrja V, Vuorenkoski L, et al. Finland: health system review. Health Syst Transit. Aug 2019;21(2):1-166. [ Medline ]
• Social Welfare Act 1301/2014. Finlex. URL: https://finlex.fi/fi/laki/ajantasa/2014/20141301#L3P21 [accessed 2023-01-20]
• Vänskä J, Viitanen J, Hyppönen H, Elovainio M, Winblad I, Reponen J, et al. Lääkärien arviot potilastietojärjestelmistä kriittisiä. Suomen Lääkärilehti. 2010;52(65):4177-4183.
• Viitanen J, Hyppönen H, Lääveri T, Vänskä J, Reponen J, Winblad I. National questionnaire study on clinical ICT systems proofs: physicians suffer from poor usability. Int J Med Inform. Oct 2011;80(10):708-725. [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Hyppönen H, Lääveri T, Hahtela N, Suutarla A, Sillanpää K, Kinnunen U, et al. Kyvykkäille käyttäjille fiksut järjestelmät? Sairaanhoitajien arviot potilastietojärjestelmistä 2017. FinJeHeW. Mar 08, 2018;10(1):30-59. [ CrossRef ]
• Saranto K, Kinnunen U, Koponen S, Kyytsönen M, Hyyppönen H, Vehko T. Sairaanhoitajien valmiudet tiedonhallintaan sekä kokemukset potilas- ja asiakastietojärjestelmien tuesta työtehtäviin. FinJeHeW. Oct 13, 2020;12(3):212-228. [ CrossRef ]
• Saranto K, Koponen S, Vehko T, Kivekäs E. Nurse managers' opinions of information system support for performance management: a correlational study. Methods Inf Med. Jun 09, 2023;62(S 01):e63-e72. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Ylönen K, Salovaara S, Kaipio J, Tyllinen M, Tynkkynen E, Hautala S, et al. Sosiaalialan asiakastietojärjestelmissä paljon parannettavaa: käyttäjäkokemukset 2019. FinJeHeW. Mar 05, 2020;12(1):30-43. [ CrossRef ]
• Salovaara S, Ylönen K, Silén M, Viitanen J, Lääveri T, Hautala S. Sosiaalialan korkeakoulutettujen ammattilaisten arviot asiakastietojärjestelmistä 2020. FinJeHeW. May 09, 2022;14(2):191-207. [ CrossRef ]
• European Union. General Data Protection Regulation 2016/679. European Union. URL: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=celex%3A32016R0679 [accessed 2023-05-03]
• Sammut R, Griscti O, Norman IJ. Strategies to improve response rates to web surveys: a literature review. Int J Nurs Stud. Nov 2021;123:104058. [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Timmins F, Ottonello G, Napolitano F, Musio ME, Calzolari M, Gammone M, et al. The state of the science-the impact of declining response rates by nurses in nursing research projects. J Clin Nurs. Apr 02, 2023;32(7-8):e9-e11. [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Tilastot. The Finnish Union of Practical Nurses. URL: https://www.superliitto.fi/super-info/superin-toiminta/tilastot/ [accessed 2023-09-29]
• Mobile data usage got a boost when we were immobile. Tefficient. URL: https://tefficient.com/mobile-data-usage-got-a-boost-when-we-were-immobile/#more-5938 [accessed 2022-02-21]
• Dexheimer JW, Borycki EM. Use of mobile devices in the emergency department: a scoping review. Health Informatics J. Dec 29, 2015;21(4):306-315. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Flynn GAH, Polivka B, Behr JH. Smartphone use by nurses in acute care settings. CIN: Computers, Informatics, Nursing. 2018;36(3):120-126. [ CrossRef ]
• Zhang H, Cocosila M, Archer N. Factors of adoption of mobile information technology by homecare nurses: a technology acceptance model 2 approach. Comput Inform Nurs. 2010;28(1):49-56. [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Hyppönen H, Kaipio J, Heponiemi T, Lääveri T, Aalto A, Vänskä J, et al. Developing the national usability-focused health information system scale for physicians: validation study. J Med Internet Res. May 16, 2019;21(5):e12875. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]

Abbreviations

Edited by T de Azevedo Cardoso; submitted 03.03.23; peer-reviewed by S Nissinen, S Ashraf, C Wang, R Zhang ; comments to author 19.09.23; revised version received 06.10.23; accepted 23.04.24; published 29.05.24.

©Satu Paatela, Maiju Kyytsönen, Kaija Saranto, Ulla-Mari Kinnunen, Tuulikki Vehko. Originally published in the Journal of Medical Internet Research (https://www.jmir.org), 29.05.2024.

This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work, first published in the Journal of Medical Internet Research, is properly cited. The complete bibliographic information, a link to the original publication on https://www.jmir.org/, as well as this copyright and license information must be included.