Interventions to Increase Physician Efficiency and Comfort with an Electronic Health Record System^[*]

Summary

Objective: To determine comfort when using the Electronic Health Record (EHR) and increase in documentation efficiency after an educational intervention for physicians to improve their transition to a new EHR.

Methods: This study was a single-center randomized, parallel, non-blinded controlled trial of real-time, focused educational interventions by physician peers in addition to usual training in the intervention arm compared with usual training in the control arm. Participants were 44 internal medicine physi cians and residents stratified to groups using a survey of comfort with electronic media during rollout of a system-wide EHR and order entry system. Outcomes were median time to complete a progress note, notes completed after shift, and comfort with EHR at 20 and 40 shifts.

Results: In the intervention group, 73 education sessions averaging 14.4 (SD: 7.7) minutes were completed with intervention group participants, who received an average of 3.47 (SD: 2.1) interventions. Intervention group participants decreased their time to complete a progress note more quickly than controls over 30 shifts (p < 0.001) and recorded significantly fewer progress notes after scheduled duty hours (77 versus 292, p < 0.001). Comfort with EHRs increased significantly in both groups from baseline but did not differ significantly by group. Intervention group participants felt that the intervention was more helpful than their standard training (3.47 versus 1.95 on 4-point scale).

Conclusion: Physicians teaching physicians during clinical work improved physician efficiency but not comfort with EHRs. More study is needed to determine best methods to assist those most challenged with new EHR rollouts.

Keywords

Electronic Health Records/utilization - education - physicians

^* Supplementary material published on our web-site www.methods-online.com

• References

• 1 Jha AK, DesRoches CM, Campbell EG, Donelan K, Rao SR, Ferris TG. et al. Use of electronic health records in U.S. hospitals. N Engl J Med 2009; 360 (16) 1628-1638.
• 2 CDC - Meaningful Use [Internet]. [cited 2013 Dec 9]. Available from. http://www.cdc.gov/ ehrmeaningfuluse/.
• 3 Kellermann AL, Jones SS. What It Will Take To Achieve The As-Yet-Unfulfilled Promises Of Health Information Technology. Health Aff [Millwood] 2013; 32 (01) 63-68.
• 4 Vishwanath A, Scamurra SD. Barriers to the adoption of electronic health records: using concept mapping to develop a comprehensive empirical model. Health Informatics J 2007; 13 (02) 119-134.
• 5 Bredfeldt CE, Awad EB, Joseph K, Snyder MH. Training providers: beyond the basics of electronic health records. BMC Health Serv Res 2013; 13 (01) 503.
• 6 Drezner JL. Understanding adoption of new technologies by physicians. MedGenMed Medscape Gen Med 2000; 2 (01) E16.
• 7 Van der Meijden MJ, Tange H, Troost J, Hasman A. Development and implementation of an EPR: how to encourage the user. Int J Med Inf 2001; 64 2-3 173-185.
• 8 Ward R, Stevens C, Brentnall P, Briddon J. The attitudes of health care staff to information technology: a comprehensive review of the research literature. Health Inf Libr J 2008; 25 (02) 81-97.
• 9 Safran C. Informatics training for clinicians is more important than hardware and software. Yearb Med Inform. 2009: 164-165.
• 10 Rockswold PD, Finnell VW. Predictors of tool usage in the military health system’s electronic health record, the Armed Forces Health Longitudinal Technology Application. Mil Med 2010; 175 (05) 313-316.
• 11 Chisolm DJ, Purnell TS, Cohen DM, McAlearney AS. Clinician perceptions of an electronic medical record during the first year of implementaton in emergency services. Pediatr Emerg Care 2010; 26 (02) 107-110.
• 12 Gagnon M-P. Légaré F, Labrecque M, Frémont P, Pluye P, Gagnon J. et al. Interventions for promoting information and communication technologies adoption in healthcare professionals. Cochrane Database Syst Rev Online 2009; (01) CD006093.
• 13 Kirshner M, Salomon H, Chin H. An evaluation of one-on-one advanced proficiency training in clinicians’ use of computer information systems. Int J Med Inf 2004; 73 (04) 341-348.
• 14 Flowers CP, Hancock DR, Joyner RE. Effects of Instructional Strategies and Conceptual Levels on Students’ Motivation and Achievement in a Technology Course. J Res Dev Educ 2000; 33 (03) 187-194.
• 15 Durning SJ, Artino AR. Situativity theory: a perspective on how participants and the environment can interact: AMEE Guide no. 52. Med Teach 2011; 33 (03) 188-199.
• 16 Snedecor GW, Cochran WG. Statistical methods. Ames: Iowa State University Press; 1989
• 17 Hripcsak G, Vawdrey DK, Fred MR, Bostwick SB. Use of electronic clinical documentation: time spent and team interactions. J Am Med Inform Assoc JAMIA 2011; 18 (02) 112-117.
• 18 Desai M, Richards T. End-User Training: A Meta-Model. J Instr Psychol 1999; 26 (02) 74-83.
• 19 Greitzer F, Kuchar O, Huston K. Cognitive Science Implications for Enhancing Training Effectiveness in a Serious Gaming Context. ACM J Educ Resour Comput 2007; 7 (03) 1-16.
• 20 Wu P, Jackson C, Hunt M. Electronic health record physician adoption strategies. Physician Exec 2010; 36 (06) 54-56.
• 21 Zheng K, Padman R, Krackhardt D, Johnson MP, Diamond HS. Social networks and physician adoption of electronic health records: insights from an empirical study. J Am Med Inform Assoc JAMIA 2010; 17 (03) 328-336.