Electronic health records: which practices have them,and how are clinicians using them?

Background Limited data exist to estimate the use of electronic health records (EHRs) in ambulatory care practices in the United States. Methods We surveyed a stratified random sample of 1829 office practices in Massachusetts in 2005. The one‐page survey measured use of health information technology, plans for EHR adoption and perceived barriers to adoption. Results A total of 847 surveys were returned, for a response rate of 46%. Overall, 18% of office practices reported having an EHR. Primary‐care‐only and mixed practices reported similar adoption rates (23% and 25%, respectively, P = 0.70). The adoption rate in specialty practices (14%) was lower compared with both primary‐care‐only (P < 0.01) and mixed (P < 0.05) practices. The number of clinicians in the practice strongly correlated with EHR adoption (P < 0.001), with fewer small practices adopting EHRs. Among practices that have EHRs with laboratory and radiology result retrieval capabilities, at least 87% of practices report that a majority of their clinicians actively use these functionalities, while 74% of practices with electronic decision support report that the majority of clinicians actively use it. Among the practices without an EHR, 13% plan to implement one within the next 12 months, 24% within the next 1–2 years, 11% within the next 3–5 years, and 52% reported having no plans to implement an EHR in the foreseeable future. The most frequently reported barrier to implementation was lack of adequate funding (42%). Conclusions Overall, fewer than 1 in 5 medical practices in Massachusetts have an EHR. Even among adopters, though, doctor usage of EHR functions varied considerably by functionality and across practices. Many clinicians are not actively using functionalities that are necessary to improve health care quality and patient safety. Furthermore, among practices that do not have EHRs, more than half have no plan for adoption. Inadequate funding remains an important barrier to EHR adoption in ambulatory care practices in the United States.     

Motivations and barriers to implementing electronic health records and ED information systems in Japan

Background

Although electronic health record systems (EHRs) and emergency department information systems (EDISs) enable safe, efficient, and high-quality care, these systems have not yet been studied well. Here, we assessed (1) the prevalence of EHRs and EDISs, (2) changes in efficiency in emergency medical practices after introducing EHR and EDIS, and (3) barriers to and expectations from the EHR-EDIS transition in EDs of medical facilities with EHRs in Japan.

Materials and methods

A survey regarding EHR (basic or comprehensive) and EDIS implementation was mailed to 466 hospitals. We examined the efficiency after EHR implementation and perceived barriers and expectations regarding the use of EDIS with existing EHRs. The survey was completed anonymously.

Results

Totally, 215 hospitals completed the survey (response rate, 46.1%), of which, 76.3% had basic EHRs, 4.2% had comprehensive EHRs, and 1.9% had EDISs. After introducing EHRs and EDISs, a reduction in the time required to access previous patient information and share patient information was noted, but no change was observed in the time required to produce medical records and the overall time for each medical care. For hospitals with EHRs, the most commonly cited barriers to EDIS implementation were inadequate funding for adoption and maintenance and potential adverse effects on workflow. The most desired function in the EHR-EDIS transition was establishing appropriate clinical guidelines for residents within their system.

Conclusion

To attract EDs to EDIS from EHR, systems focusing on decreasing the time required to produce medical records and establishing appropriate clinical guidelines for residents are required.     

Physician Specialty and Variations in Adoption of Electronic Health Records

Objective

Efforts to promote adoption of electronic health records (EHRs) have focused on primary care physicians, who are now expected to exchange data electronically with other providers, including specialists. However, the variation of EHR adoption among specialists is underexplored.

Methods

We conducted a retrospective cross-sectional study to determine the association between physician specialty and the prevalence of EHR adoption, and a retrospective serial cross-sectional study to determine the association of physician specialty and the rate of EHR adoption over time. We used the 2005–2009 National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey. We considered fourteen specialties, and four definitions of EHR adoption (any EHR, basic EHR, full EHR, and a novel definition of EHR sophistication). We used multivariable logistic regression, and adjusted for several covariates (geography, practice characteristics, revenue characteristics, physician degree).

Results

Physician specialty was significantly associated with EHR adoption, regardless of the EHR definition, after adjusting for covariates. Psychiatrists, dermatologists, pediatricians, ophthalmologists, and general surgeons were significantly less likely to adopt EHRs, compared to the reference group of family medicine / general practitioners. After adjustment for covariates, these specialties were 44 – 94% less likely to adopt EHRs than the reference group. EHR adoption increased in all specialties, by approximately 40% per year. The rate of EHR adoption over time did not significantly vary by specialty.

Conclusions

Although EHR adoption is increasing in all specialties, adoption varies widely by specialty. In order to insure each individual’s network of providers can electronically share data, widespread adoption of EHRs is needed across all specialties.     

Satisfaction of health‐care providers with electronic health records and perceived barriers to its implementation in the United Arab Emirates

The integration of electronic health records (EHRs) has shown promise in improving health‐care quality. In the United Arab Emirates, EHRs have been recently adopted to improve the quality and safety of patient care. A cross‐sectional survey of 680 health‐care providers (HCPs) was conducted to assess the satisfaction of HCPs in the United Arab Emirates with EHRs' impact on access/viewing, documentation and medication administration and to explore the barriers encountered in their use. Data were collected over 6 months from April to September 2014. High overall satisfaction with EHRs was reported by HCPs, suggesting their acceptance. Physicians reported the greatest overall satisfaction with EHRs, although nurses showed significantly higher satisfaction with the impact on medication administration compared with other HCPs. The most significant barriers reported by nurses were lack of belief in the value of EHRs for patients and lack of adequate computer skills. Given the large investment in technology, additional research is necessary to promote the full utilization of EHRs. Nurses need to be aware of the value of EHRs for patient care and be involved in all stages of EHR implementations to maximize its meaningful use for better clinical outcomes.     

Clinician Perceptions of Pediatric Growth Chart Use and Electronic Health Records in Kentucky

Background

Growth chart recording is a key component of pediatric care. EHR systems could provide several growth charting functionalities compared to paper methods. To our knowledge, there has been no U.S. study exploring clinicians’ perceptions and practices related to recording of growth parameters as they adapt to electronic methods.

Objectives

To explore clinician practices regarding recording growth parameters as they adapt to electronic health records (EHR) and to investigate clinician perceptions of electronic growth charting using EHR.

Methods

An online survey of pediatricians and family practitioners in Kentucky inquiring about EHR usage, specifically use of growth charting with EHR, was conducted.

Results

Forty-six percent of respondents utilized EHRs, with pediatricians lagging family practitioners, and academic pediatricians lagging non-academicians. There was no consensus on EHR platforms being used. Almost a third of those who used EHR did not utilize electronic growth charting. Clinicians using EHR reported that electronic growth charts would improve clinician satisfaction and clinical efficiency as well as parent satisfaction and parent education. Only 12% of respondents provided copies of growth charts to parents at the end of their visit and discussed growth parameters with parents, with clinicians using EHR more likely to engage in these activities than non-EHR users.

Conclusion

Although Kentucky clinicians continue to slowly adopt EHRs, clinician perceptions and practices reflect enduring barriers to widespread use of electronic growth charting in pediatric and family practice. However, our results suggest that electronic growth charting has important benefits for both clinicians and patients, and greater adoption is expected as EHRs become standard across health care systems.     

Electronic Health Record Adoption – Maybe It’s not about the Money: Physician Super-Users,Electronic Health Records and Patient Care

Objective

The slow adoption of electronic health record (EHR) systems has been linked to physician resistance to change and the expense of EHR adoption. This qualitative study was conducted to evaluate benefits, and clarify limitations of two mature, robust, comprehensive EHR Systems by tech-savvy physicians where resistance and expense are not at issue.

Methods

Two EHR systems were examined – the paperless VistA / Computerized Patient Record System used at the Veterans’ Administration, and the General Electric Centricity Enterprise system used at an academic medical center. A series of interviews was conducted with 20 EHR-savvy multiinstitutional internal medicine (IM) faculty and house staff. Grounded theory was used to analyze the transcribed data and build themes. The relevance and importance of themes were constructed by examining their frequency, convergence, and intensity.

Results

Despite eliminating resistance to both adoption and technology as drivers of acceptance, these two robust EHR’s are still viewed as having an adverse impact on two aspects of patient care, physician workflow and team communication. Both EHR’s had perceived strengths but also significant limitations and neither were able to satisfactorily address all of the physicians’ needs.

Conclusion

Difficulties related to physician acceptance reflect real concerns about EHR impact on patient care. Physicians are optimistic about the future benefits of EHR systems, but are frustrated with the non-intuitive interfaces and cumbersome data searches of existing EHRs.     

Satisfaction after the transition between electronic health record systems at six ambulatory practices

Rationale, aims and objectives Early adopters of electronic health records (EHRs) are transitioning from older to newer EHRs to satisfy meaningful use requirements. Facilitators and barriers to satisfaction after transitioning are important to understand as provider satisfaction is linked with improvement in health care. Method We conducted a cross‐sectional survey of providers who transitioned from an older to a newer EHR at six academic, urban ambulatory medical practices. A novel survey was developed to assess: (1) satisfaction with the EHR implementation; (2) patterns of information technology use; (3) work perceptions; (4) methods for completing clinical tasks; and (5) demographic characteristics. We analysed the results using bivariate and multivariate analyses. Results The response rate was 64% (n = 197). A small majority were satisfied with the new EHR (64%, n = 120). Providers who reported satisfaction with overall quality of work life, their workload and the transition were more likely to be satisfied with the new EHR (P < 0.01). Providers who reported using the Internet at least daily were also more likely to be satisfied with the new EHR (P < 0.05). In a multivariate model, satisfaction with the transition was a strong predictor of satisfaction with the new EHR (P < 0.01). Barriers to satisfaction include dissatisfaction with: maintaining problem and medication lists, tracking health maintenance information, referring to clinical practice guidelines and ordering laboratory and radiology tests (P < 0.01). Conclusion This study provides groundwork for understanding the facilitators and barriers to provider satisfaction after the transition between EHRs and provides insight into areas requiring attention by entities undergoing similar transitions.     

Electronic Health Records: Patient Care and Ethical and Legal Implications for Nurse Practitioners

Electronic health records (EHRs), with their adoption incentivized as part of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, are now a ubiquitous part of the health care landscape. Although these systems promised to improve the quality of patient care, increase efficiency, and reduce costs, health care providers are finding that current EHRs instead require time-consuming data entry, can interfere with patient interactions, and cause medical errors. Nurse practitioners should implement practical tips and best practices for navigating and successfully using EHRs, as well as risk management strategies to ensure better patient care and avoid malpractice litigation or licensing issues.     

Awareness of the Care Team in Electronic Health Records

OBJECTIVE: To support collaboration and clinician-targeted decision support, electronic health records (EHRs) must contain accurate information about patients' care providers. The objective of this study was to evaluate two approaches for care provider identification employed within a commercial EHR at a large academic medical center. METHODS: We performed a retrospective review of EHR data for 121 patients in two cardiology wards during a four-week period. System audit logs of chart accesses were analyzed to identify the clinicians who were likely participating in the patients' hospital care. The audit log data were compared with two functions in the EHR for documenting care team membership: 1) a vendor-supplied module called "Care Providers", and 2) a custom "Designate Provider" order that was created primarily to improve accuracy of the attending physician of record documentation. RESULTS: For patients with a 3-5 day hospital stay, an average of 30.8 clinicians accessed the electronic chart, including 10.2 nurses, 1.4 attending physicians, 2.3 residents, and 5.4 physician assistants. The Care Providers module identified 2.7 clinicians/patient (1.8 attending physicians and 0.9 nurses). The Designate Provider order identified 2.1 clinicians/patient (1.1 attending physicians, 0.2 resident physicians, and 0.8 physician assistants). Information about other members of patients' care teams (social workers, dietitians, pharmacists, etc.) was absent. CONCLUSIONS: The two methods for specifying care team information failed to identify numerous individuals involved in patients' care, suggesting that commercial EHRs may not provide adequate tools for care team designation. Improvements to EHR tools could foster greater collaboration among care teams and reduce communication-related risks to patient safety.     

Electronic health records: a primer for practicing physicians

Electronic health records (EHRs) offer a number of advantages over the old paper record. They have the potential to improve the quality of patient care, reduce the cost of health care, and expedite the transfer of information. Yet fewer than 20% of hospitals and physician practices now use them. We discuss the advantages of EHRs, reasons for adopting this system, current barriers to the adoption of EHRs, and issues to consider when choosing a system.     

Distances to Emergency Department and to Primary Care Provider's Office Affect Emergency Department Use in Children

Objectives:  Patients of all ages use emergency departments (EDs) for primary care. Several studies have evaluated patient and system characteristics that influence pediatric ED use. However, the issue of proximity as a predictor of ED use has not been well studied. The authors sought to determine whether ED use by pediatric Medicaid enrollees was associated with the distance to their primary care providers (PCPs), distance to the nearest ED, and distance to the nearest children's hospital.
Methods:  This historical cohort study included 26,038 children age 18 and under, assigned to 332 primary care practices affiliated with a Medicaid health maintenance organization (HMO). Predictor variables were distance from the child's home to his or her PCP site, distance from home to the nearest ED, and distance from home to the nearest children's hospital. The outcome variable was each child's ED use. A negative binomial model was used to determine the association between distance variables and ED use, adjusted for age, sex, and race, plus medical and primary care site characteristics previously found to influence ED use. Distance variables were divided into quartiles to test for nonlinear associations.
Results:  On average, children made 0.31 ED visits/person/year. In the multivariable model, children living greater than 1.19 miles from the nearest ED had 11% lower ED use than those living within 0.5 miles of the nearest ED (risk ratio [RR] = 0.89, 95% CI = 0.81 to 0.99). Children living between 1.54 and 3.13 miles from their PCPs had 13% greater ED use (RR = 1.13, 95% CI = 1.03 to 1.24) than those who lived within 0.7 miles of their PCP.
Conclusions:  Geographical variables play a significant role in ED utilization in children, confirming the importance of system-level determinants of ED use and creating the opportunity for interventions to reduce geographical barriers to primary care.     

Meaningful Use of Electronic Health Records

The concerns on patient safety and quality improvement in health care are increasing. There is growing use of technology in health care, particularly use of the electronic health record (EHR). As this occurs, the health care system is transforming. The federal government has become involved in EHR implementation, encouraging improved health care. The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services are implementing the Meaningful Use (MU) Incentive Program for Medicare- and Medicaid-eligible providers. As EHR implementation and MU Programs grow, it is important for the nurse practitioner (NP) to be aware of the MU Program. As NPs become engaged in using EHRs, MU will have an impact on changing health care systems and implications related to clinical practice and improved outcomes.     

Degree and correlates of patient trust in their cardiologist

Rationale and objectives  Trust in one's doctor has been associated with increased treatment adherence, patient satisfaction and improved health status. This study investigated the level and correlates of patient trust in their cardiac specialist.
Methods  All 386 urban cardiologists in Southern Ontario (95 participating, response rate = 30%) were approached to recruit a sample of their coronary artery disease outpatients. A total of 1111 recent and consecutive patients consented to participate (approximately 13 patients per cardiologist, 317 female (26.7%); response rate = 60%), and clinical data were extracted from their medical charts. Participants completed a mailed survey including the Trust in Physicians scale, in addition to an assessment of socio-demographic, clinical and psychosocial correlates.
Results  The mean trust score was equivalent to that reported in studies of primary care patients. Results of the significant multivariate model (F = 7.631, P  < 0.001) revealed that less education ( P  < 0.001), higher systolic blood pressure ( P  = 0.022), less perceived cyclical/unpredictable illness timeline ( P  = 0.007) and greater perceived personal control over their heart condition ( P  = 0.004), were significant correlates of greater trust in cardiologist care.
Conclusions  The significance of education is corroborated by findings of lower satisfaction with cardiac care among those of higher socio-economic status, despite having generally greater access to care in Ontario. Moreover, the relationship between hypertension and greater trust may suggest that such perceptions are not based on doctor competence. Future studies should further investigate the correlates of trust, as well as the impact of trust on cardiac health outcomes.     

The effect of hospital electronic health record adoption on nurse-assessed quality of care and patient safety

The aim of this study was to examine the effect of having a basic electronic health record (EHR) on nurse-assessed quality of care, including patient safety. Few large-scale studies have examined how adoption of EHRs may be associated with quality of care. A cross-sectional, secondary analysis of nurse and hospital survey data was conducted. The final sample included 16,352 nurses working in 316 hospitals in 4 states. Logistic regression models were used to evaluate the relationship between basic EHR adoption and nurse-assessed quality of care outcomes. Nurses working in hospitals with basic EHRs consistently reported that poor patient safety and other quality outcomes occurred less frequently than reported by nurses working in hospitals without an EHR. Our findings suggest that the implementation of a basic EHR may result in improved and more efficient nursing care, better care coordination, and patient safety.     

Availability of Rapid Human Immunodeficiency Virus Testing in Academic Emergency Departments

Objectives:  The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) recommends routine human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) screening of emergency department (ED) patients aged 13 to 64 years. The study objectives were to determine the accessibility of rapid HIV testing in academic EDs, to identify factors that influence an ED's adoption of testing, and to describe current HIV testing practices.
Methods:  Online surveys were sent to EDs affiliated with emergency medicine (EM) residency programs ( n  = 128), excluding federal hospitals and facilities in U.S. territories. Eighty percent ( n  = 102) responded. Most e-mail recipients ( n  = 121) were Emergency Medicine Network (EMNet) investigators; remaining contacts were obtained from residency-related Web sites.
Results:  Most academic EDs ( n  = 58; 57%; 95% confidence interval (CI) = 47% to 66%) offer rapid HIV testing. Among this group, 26 (45%) allow providers to order tests without restrictions. Of the other 32 EDs, 100% have policies allowing for rapid HIV testing following occupational exposures, but less than 10% have guidelines for testing in other clinical situations. Forty-seven percent expect to routinely offer HIV testing in the next 2 to 3 years. Only 59% of the EDs that offered rapid tests in any situation could link an HIV-positive patient to subspecialty care. The facility characteristic most important to availability of rapid HIV testing was the presence of on-site HIV counselors.
Conclusions:  Most academic EDs now offer rapid HIV testing (57%), but few use it in situations other than occupational exposure. Less than half of academic EDs expect to implement CDC guidelines regarding routine screening within the next few years. The authors identified facility characteristics (e.g., counseling, ability to refer) that may influence adoption of rapid HIV testing.