Loading article...
Loading article...
Stream/Area:
-
Subject:
-
Paper ID:
IJSREM67786
Volume:
10 |
10 |
Oct 2026
Pages:
1--
Publication Frequency:
Monthly (12 issues per year)
License:International Journal of Scientific Research in Engineering and Management follows the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0) License, allowing free use and distribution with proper attribution.
Department of Master of Computer Applications.
IBMR – Audyogik Shikshan Mandal’s Institute of Business Management and Research, Pune, Maharashtra, India.
Department of Master of Computer Applications.
IBMR – Audyogik Shikshan Mandal’s Institute of Business Management and Research, Pune, Maharashtra, India.
Department of Master of Computer Applications.
IBMR – Audyogik Shikshan Mandal’s Institute of Business Management and Research, Pune, Maharashtra, India.
Department of Master of Computer Applications.
IBMR – Audyogik Shikshan Mandal’s Institute of Business Management and Research, Pune, Maharashtra, India.
Department of Master of Computer Applications.
IBMR – Audyogik Shikshan Mandal’s Institute of Business Management and Research, Pune, Maharashtra, India.
Primary health centres in India are slowly moving patient records and medicine stock management onto digital systems, but there are few field accounts of how this works in busy, low-resource clinics. This review compares two such accounts: an ethnographic study of a patient-centric electronic health record (IHIS4PHC) at an urban primary care centre in Chandigarh, and a benefit evaluation of e-Aushadhi, the drug inventory system run by the Rajasthan government. We re-read both papers under six common headings: system design, implementation support, staff perception, patient experience, measured outcomes and remaining barriers. Both systems reduced duplicate paperwork and made reporting easier, although staff in Chandigarh found data entry slow and rigid in the early months. The systems differ mainly in what they cover. IHIS4PHC holds patient records and an in-clinic stock module but has no link to district procurement. e-Aushadhi runs procurement and warehouse distribution but holds no patient clinical record. Neither passes clinical data into an estimate of local medicine demand. The evidence base is small and our conclusions are tentative, but the gap is clear enough to justify work on connected systems. We also draw out design requirements for such a system from the barriers the two studies report.
KEYWORDS
Both studies show that digitisation at primary level pays off once staff get past a difficult first few months, with faster reports, less duplicate entry and quicker supply. They also show that patient records and medicine supply have been handled as separate problems. IHIS4PHC kept stock inside the clinic and e-Aushadhi managed it from the district upward, and neither was designed to pass clinical data into demand estimates. Connecting the two sides is therefore still an open task, and any attempt will need to plan early for staff support, reliable power and connectivity, and an evaluation approach that covers both adoption and supply outcomes. For practice, the message is that a connected system should be planned as a service with support, power, standards and governance, and not as software alone. For research, the most useful next step is a small, well-measured pilot that tests whether clinical counts improve local stock decisions. Until such evidence exists, the case for connecting the two halves rests on the logic of the gap and on the experience of two systems that each did their own job well.
[1] D. S. Faujdar, T. Singh, M. Kaur, S. Sahay, and R. Kumar, “Stakeholders’ perceptions of the implementation of a patient-centric digital health application for primary healthcare in India,” Healthc. Inform. Res., vol. 27, no. 4, pp. 315–324, 2021. [2] A. Bassi, O. John, D. Praveen, P. K. Maulik, R. Panda, and V. Jha, “Current status and future directions of mHealth interventions for health system strengthening in India: Systematic review,” JMIR mHealth uHealth, vol. 6, no. 10, art. e11440, 2018. [3] Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, National Health Policy 2017. New Delhi, India: Government of India, 2017. [4] Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, Ayushman Bharat: Comprehensive Primary Health Care through Health and Wellness Centres, Operational Guidelines. New Delhi, India: Government of India, 2018. [5] S. Prinja, P. Bahuguna, J. P. Tripathy, and R. Kumar, “Availability of medicines in public sector health facilities of two North Indian States,” BMC Pharmacol. Toxicol., vol. 16, art. 43, 2015. [6] N. Mantri, N. K. Joshi, P. Bhardwaj, B. Manda, V. Joshi, K. Singh, and R. Passi, “Assessment of e-Aushadhi program (drug inventory e-health initiative in Rajasthan) using benefit evaluation framework,” J. Family Med. Prim. Care, vol. 11, no. 5, pp. 2038–2044, 2022. [7] Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, Electronic Health Record (EHR) Standards for India. New Delhi, India: Government of India, 2016. [8] National Health Authority, “Ayushman Bharat Digital Mission,” Government of India. [Online]. Available: https://abdm.gov.in [9] Government of India, The Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023, Act No. 22 of 2023. [10] World Health Organization, WHO Guideline: Recommendations on Digital Interventions for Health System Strengthening. Geneva, Switzerland: WHO, 2019.
Publication Date
10/10/2026
Peer Review Type
Double-Blind Peer Review
Review Rounds: 2
Documents
Article Views
4
Total views since publication
PDF Downloads
12
Total downloads since publication
Geographic Reach
5
Digital Preservation: This article is permanently archived on Zenodo and complies with all data preservation standards across major indexing platforms.
Plagiarism Screening
This manuscript has been checked for plagiarism using TurnitinPlagiarismChecker software.
Conflict of Interest
The authors declare no conflict of interest related to this research work.
Funding Information
No funding information available for this research.
Related research in the same subject area
Loading similar articles...