Download PDF
Appl Clin Inform 2015; 06(01): 27-41
DOI: 10.4338/ACI-2014-08-RA-0065
Research Article
Schattauer GmbH

Emergency Medicine Resident Physicians’ Perceptions of Electronic Documentation and Workflow

A mixed methods study
P.M. Neri
1   Clinical & Quality Analysis, Partners HealthCare System, Wellesley, MA
,
L. Redden
1   Clinical & Quality Analysis, Partners HealthCare System, Wellesley, MA
,
S. Poole
2   Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Boston, MA
3   Neil and Elise Wallace STRATUS Center for Medical Simulation
4   Simulation Consulting, Phoenix, Arizona, USA
,
C.N. Pozner
2   Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Boston, MA
3   Neil and Elise Wallace STRATUS Center for Medical Simulation
5   Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA
,
J. Horsky
2   Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Boston, MA
5   Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA
,
A.S. Raja
2   Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Boston, MA
5   Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA
,
E. Poon
6   Boston Medical Center, Boston University School of Medicine, Boston, MA
,
G. Schiff
2   Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Boston, MA
5   Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA
,
A. Landman
2   Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Boston, MA
5   Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

received: 02 September 2014

accepted: 15 February 2014

Publication Date:
19 December 2017 (online)

Also available at
   Permissions and Reprints

Summary

Objective: To understand emergency department (ED) physicians’ use of electronic documentation in order to identify usability and workflow considerations for the design of future ED information system (EDIS) physician documentation modules.

Methods: We invited emergency medicine resident physicians to participate in a mixed methods study using task analysis and qualitative interviews. Participants completed a simulated, standardized patient encounter in a medical simulation center while documenting in the test environment of a currently used EDIS. We recorded the time on task, type and sequence of tasks performed by the participants (including tasks performed in parallel). We then conducted semi-structured interviews with each participant. We analyzed these qualitative data using the constant comparative method to generate themes.

Results: Eight resident physicians participated. The simulation session averaged 17 minutes and participants spent 11 minutes on average on tasks that included electronic documentation. Participants performed tasks in parallel, such as history taking and electronic documentation. Five of the 8 participants performed a similar workflow sequence during the first part of the session while the remaining three used different workflows. Three themes characterize electronic documentation: (1) physicians report that location and timing of documentation varies based on patient acuity and workload, (2) physicians report a need for features that support improved efficiency; and (3) physicians like viewing available patient data but struggle with integration of the EDIS with other information sources.

Conclusion: We confirmed that physicians spend much of their time on documentation (65%) during an ED patient visit. Further, we found that resident physicians did not all use the same work-flow and approach even when presented with an identical standardized patient scenario. Future EHR design should consider these varied workflows while trying to optimize efficiency, such as improving integration of clinical data. These findings should be tested quantitatively in a larger, representative study.

Citation: Neri PM, Redden L, Poole S, Pozner CN, Horsky J, Raja AS, Poon E, Schiff G, Landman A. Emergency medicine resident physicians’ perceptions of electronic documentation and workflow – a mixed methods study. Appl Clin Inf 2015; 6: 27–41

http://dx.doi.org/10.4338/ACI-2014-08-RA-0065

Keywords

Workflow - electronic documentation - emergency department - electronic health records

 

  • References

  • 1 Meaningful Use Stage 2 Overview Tipsheet. 2012 ; Available from: http://www.cms.gov/Regulations-andGuidance/Legislation/EHRIncentivePrograms/Downloads/Stage2Overview_Tipsheet.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Landman AB, Bernstein SL, Hsiao AL, Desai RA. Emergency Department Information System Adoption in the United States. Acad Emerg Med 2010; 17 (05) 536-544. doi: 10.1111/j.1553–2712.2010.00722.x.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 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. Epub 2013/01/09. doi: 10.1377/hlthaff.2012.0693. PubMed PMID: 23297272.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Middleton B, Bloomrosen M, Dente MA, Hashmat B, Koppel R, Overhage JM, Payne TH, Rosenbloom ST, Weaver C, Zhang J. Enhancing patient safety and quality of care by improving the usability of electronic health record systems: recommendations from AMIA. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2013 doi: 10.1136/amiajnl-2012-001458.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Poissant L, Pereira J, Tamblyn R, Kawasumi Y. The impact of electronic health records on time efficiency of physicians and nurses: a systematic review. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2005; 12 (05) 505-516. Epub 2005/05/21. doi: 10.1197/jamia. M1700. PubMed PMID: 15905487; PubMed Central PMCID: PMCPmc1205599.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Ammenwerth E, Spotl HP. The time needed for clinical documentation versus direct patient care. A work-sampling analysis of physicians’ activities. Methods Inf Med 2009; 48 (01) 84-91. Epub 2009/01/20. PubMed PMID: 19151888.
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Kim CS, Lovejoy W, Paulsen M, Chang R, Flanders SA. Hospitalist time usage and cyclicality: opportunities to improve efficiency. J Hosp Med 2010; 5 (06) 329-334. Epub 2010/08/31. doi: 10.1002/jhm.613. PubMed PMID: 20803670.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Oxentenko AS, West CP, Popkave C, Weinberger SE, Kolars JC. Time spent on clinical documentation: a survey of internal medicine residents and program directors. Arch Intern Med 2010; 170 (04) 377-380. Epub 2010/02/24. doi: 10.1001/archinternmed.2009.534. PubMed PMID: 20177042.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Perry JJ, Sutherland J, Symington C, Dorland K, Mansour M, Stiell IG. Assessment of the impact on time to complete medical record using an electronic medical record versus a paper record on emergency department patients: a study. Emerg Med J. 2013 Epub 2013/08/27. doi: 10.1136/emermed-2013–202479. PubMed PMID: 23975593.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Park SY, Lee SY, Chen Y. The effects of EMR deployment on doctors’ work practices: A qualitative study in the emergency department of a teaching hospital. Int J Med Inform 2012; 81 (03) 204-217. doi: 10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2011.12.001.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Chisholm CD, Collison EK, Nelson DR, Cordell WH. Emergency Department Workplace Interruptions Are Emergency Physicians “Interrupt-driven” and “Multitasking”?. Acad Emerg Med. 2000; 7 (11) 1239-1243. doi: 10.1111/j.1553–2712.2000.tb00469.x.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Weigl M, Muller A, Zupanc A, Angerer P. Participant observation of time allocation, direct patient contact and simultaneous activities in hospital physicians. BMC health services research 2009; 9: 110. Epub 2009/07/01. doi: 10.1186/1472–6963–9–110. PubMed PMID: 19563625; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC2709110.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Chisholm CD, Weaver CS, Whenmouth L, Giles B. A task analysis of emergency physician activities in academic and community settings. Ann Emerg Med 2011; 58 (02) 117-122. Epub 2011/02/01. doi: 10.1016/j.annemergmed.2010.11.026. PubMed PMID: 21276642.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Hockberger RS. The Model of the Clinical Practice of Emergency Medicine. Acad Emerg Med 2001; 8 (06) 660-681. doi: 10.1111/j.1553–2712.2001.tb00182.x.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Schiff GD, Bates DW. Can electronic clinical documentation help prevent diagnostic errors?. N Engl J Med 2010; 362 (12) 1066-1069. Epub 2010/03/26. doi: 10.1056/NEJMp0911734. PubMed PMID: 20335582.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Overhage JM, Perkins S, Tierney WM, McDonald CJ. Controlled trial of direct physician order entry: effects on physicians’ time utilization in ambulatory primary care internal medicine practices. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2001; 8 (04) 361-371. Epub 2001/06/22. PubMed PMID: 11418543; PubMed Central PMCID: PMCPmc130081.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Sofaer S. Qualitative methods: what are they and why use them?. Health Serv Res. 1999; 34 (5 Pt 2): 1101-18. Epub 1999/12/11. PubMed PMID: 10591275; PubMed Central PMCID: PMCPmc1089055.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Nielsen J. Why you only need to test with 5 users Alertbox2000. Available from: http://www.useit.com/alertbox/20000319.html
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Virzi RA. Refining the test phase of usability evaluation: how many subjects is enough?. Hum Factors 1992; 34 (04) 457-468.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Faulkner L. Beyond the five-user assumption: Benefits of increased sample sizes in usability testing. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers 2003; 35 (03) 379-383.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Patton MQ. Qualitative Research & Evaluation Methods. 3rd ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, Inc.; 2002
    Google Scholar
  • 22 Landman AB, Redden L, Neri P, Poole S, Horsky J, Raja AS, Pozner CN, Schiff G, Poon EG. Using a medical simulation center as an electronic health record usability laboratory. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2013 doi: 10.1136/amiajnl-2013–002233. PubMed PMID: 24249778.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Lawton K, Binzer K, Skjoet P, Jensen S. Lessons Learnt from Conducting a High Fidelity Simulation Test in Health IT. Patient Safety Informatics 2011; 166: 217-226.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Rothenhaus T, Kamens D, Keaton BF, Nathanson L, Nielson J, McClay JC, Taylor TB, Vallarin A. Emergency Department Information Systems: Primer for Emergency Physicians, Nurses, and IT Professionals. American College of Emergency Physicians: Resolution 22(07) Task Force White Paper. 2009. Available from: http://apps.acep.org/WorkArea/DownloadAsset.aspx?id=45756
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Glaser B, Strauss A. The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research. Chicago, IL: Aldine Transaction; 1967
    Google Scholar
  • 26 Ancker JS, Kern LM, Edwards A, Nosal S, Stein DM, Hauser D, Kaushal R. How is the electronic health record being used? Use of EHR data to assess physician-level variability in technology use. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2014 doi: 10.1136/amiajnl-2013-002627.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Diana A. Marathon Bombing Lessons: Boston Hospital Revamps Information Systems –Information-Week. InformationWeek [Internet]. 2014. Available from: http://www.informationweek.com/healthcare/clinical-information-systems/marathon-bombing-lessons-boston-hospital-revamps-information-systems/d/d-id/1234846.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Landman A, Teich JM, Pruitt P, Moore SE, Theriault J, Dorisca E, Harris S, Crim H, Lurie N, Goralnick E. The Boston Marathon Bombings Mass Casualty Incident: One Emergency Department’s Information Systems Challenges and Opportunities. Ann Emerg Med. 2014. Epub 2014/07/07. doi: 10.1016/j.anne-mergmed.2014.06.009. PubMed PMID: 24997562.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Hilligoss B, Zheng K. Chart biopsy: an emerging medical practice enabled by electronic health records and its impacts on emergency department-inpatient admission handoffs. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2013; 20 (02) 260-267. Epub 2012/09/11. doi: 10.1136/amiajnl-2012–001065. PubMed PMID: 22962194; PubMed Central PMCID: PMCPmc3638186.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 30 Weir CR, Hurdle JF, Felgar MA, Hoffman JM, Roth B, Nebeker JR. Direct text entry in electronic progress notes. An evaluation of input errors. Methods Inf Med 2003; 42 (01) 61-67. Epub 2003/04/16. doi: 10.1267/meth03010061. PubMed PMID: 12695797.
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 31 O’Donnell HC, Kaushal R, Barron Y, Callahan MA, Adelman RD, Siegler EL. Physicians’ Attitudes Towards Copy and Pasting in Electronic Note Writing. J Gen Intern Med 2009; 24 (01) 63-68. doi: 10.1007/s11606–008–0843–2. PubMed PMID: 18998191; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC2607489.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 32 Zalis M, Harris M. Advanced search of the electronic medical record: augmenting safety and efficiency in radiology. J Am Coll Radiol 2010; 7 (08) 625-633. Epub 2010/08/04. doi: 10.1016/j.jacr.2010.03.011. PubMed PMID: 20678732.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 33 QPID™ | Media Coverage 2014. Available from: http://www.qpidhealth.com/category/media-coverage.
    PubMed
  • 34 Linder JA, Schnipper JL, Tsurikova R, Yu T, Volk LA, Melnikas AJ, Palchuk MB, Olsha-Yehiav M, Middleton B. Documentation-based clinical decision support to improve antibiotic prescribing for acute respiratory infections in primary care: a cluster randomised controlled trial. Inform Prim Care 2009; 17 (04) 231-240. Epub 2010/04/03. PubMed PMID: 20359401.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 35 Schnipper JL, Linder JA, Palchuk MB, Einbinder JS, Li Q, Postilnik A, Middleton B. „Smart Forms“ in an Electronic Medical Record: documentation-based clinical decision support to improve disease management. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2008; 15 (04) 513-523. doi: M2501 [pii] 10.1197/jamia. M2501. PubMed PMID: 18436911; PubMed Central PMCID: PMCPMC2442258.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 36 Schnipper JL, Linder JA, Palchuk MB, Yu DT, McColgan KE, Volk LA, Tsurikova R, Melnikas AJ, Ein-binder JS, Middleton B. Effects of documentation-based decision support on chronic disease management. Am J Manag Care 2010; 16 12 Suppl. HIT SP72-SP81. doi: 12789 [pii]. PubMed PMID: 21314226.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 37 Horsky J, Allen MB, Wilcox AR, Pollard SE, Neri P, Pallin DJ, Rothschild J.. Analysis of user behavior in accessing electronic medical record systems in emergency departments. AMIA Annu Symp Proc 2010; 2010: 311-315. PubMed PMID: 21346991; PubMed Central PMCID: PMCPMC3041327.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar