Dataset Information

Association of Medical Scribes in Primary Care With Physician Workflow and Patient Experience.

ABSTRACT:

Importance

Widespread adoption of electronic health records (EHRs) in medical care has resulted in increased physician documentation workload and decreased interaction with patients. Despite the increasing use of medical scribes for EHR documentation assistance, few methodologically rigorous studies have examined the use of medical scribes in primary care.

Objective

To evaluate the association of use of medical scribes with primary care physician (PCP) workflow and patient experience.

Design, setting, and participants

This 12-month crossover study with 2 sequences and 4 periods was conducted from July 1, 2016, to June 30, 2017, in 2 medical center facilities within an integrated health care system and included 18 of 24 eligible PCPs.

Interventions

The PCPs were randomly assigned to start the first 3-month period with or without scribes and then alternated exposure status every 3 months for 1 year, thereby serving as their own controls. The PCPs completed a 6-question survey at the end of each study period. Patients of participating PCPs were surveyed after scribed clinic visits.

Main outcomes and measures

PCP-reported perceptions of documentation burden and visit interactions, objective measures of time spent on EHR activity and required for closing encounters, and patient-reported perceptions of visit quality.

Results

Of the 18 participating PCPs, 10 were women, 12 were internal medicine physicians, and 6 were family practice physicians. The PCPs graduated from medical school a mean (SD) of 13.7 (6.5) years before the study start date. Compared with nonscribed periods, scribed periods were associated with less self-reported after-hours EHR documentation (<1 hour daily during week: adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 18.0 [95% CI, 4.7-69.0]; <1 hour daily during weekend: aOR, 8.7; 95% CI, 2.7-28.7). Scribed periods were also associated with higher likelihood of PCP-reported spending more than 75% of the visit interacting with the patient (aOR, 295.0; 95% CI, 19.7 to >900) and less than 25% of the visit on a computer (aOR, 31.5; 95% CI, 7.3-136.4). Encounter documentation was more likely to be completed by the end of the next business day during scribed periods (aOR, 2.8; 95% CI, 1.2-7.1). A total of 450 of 735 patients (61.2%) reported that scribes had a positive bearing on their visits; only 2.4% reported a negative bearing.

Conclusions and relevance

Medical scribes were associated with decreased physician EHR documentation burden, improved work efficiency, and improved visit interactions. Our results support the use of medical scribes as one strategy for improving physician workflow and visit quality in primary care.

SUBMITTER: Mishra P

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6248201 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundUse of electronic health records (EHRs) is associated with physician stress and burnout. While emergency departments and subspecialists have used scribes to address this issue, little is known about the impact of scribes in academic primary care.ObjectiveAssess the impact of a scribe on physician and patient satisfaction at an academic general internal medicine (GIM) clinic.DesignProspective, pre-post-pilot study. During the 3-month pilot, physicians had clinic sessions with and without a scribe. We assessed changes in (1) physician workplace satisfaction and burnout, (2) time spent on EHR documentation, and (3) patient satisfaction.ParticipantsSix GIM faculty and a convenience sample of their patients (N = 325) at an academic GIM clinic.Main measuresA 21-item pre- and 44-item post-pilot survey assessed physician workplace satisfaction and burnout. Physicians used logs to record time spent on EHR documentation outside of clinic hours. A 27-item post-visit survey assessed patient satisfaction during visits with and without the scribe.Key resultsOf six physicians, 100% were satisfied with clinic workflow post-pilot (vs. 33% pre-pilot), and 83% were satisfied with EHR use post-pilot (vs. 17% pre-pilot). Physician burnout was low at baseline and did not change post-pilot. Mean time spent on post-clinic EHR documentation decreased from 1.65 to 0.76 h per clinic session (p = 0.02). Patient satisfaction was not different between patients who had clinic visits with vs. without scribe overall or by age, gender, and race. Compared to patients 65 years or older, younger patients were more likely to report that the physician was more attentive and provided more education during visits with the scribe present (p = 0.03 and 0.02, respectively). Male patients were more likely to report that they disliked having a scribe (p = 0.03).ConclusionIn an academic GIM setting, employment of a scribe was associated with improved physician satisfaction without compromising patient satisfaction.

Project description:BackgroundWith the increasing adoption of electronic health record (EHR) systems, documentation-related burdens have been increasing for health care providers. Recent estimates indicate that primary care providers spend about one-half of their workdays interacting with the EHR, of which about half is focused on clerical tasks. To reduce documentation burdens associated with the EHR, health care systems and physician practices are increasingly implementing medical scribes to assist providers with real-time documentation. Scribes are typically unlicensed paraprofessionals who assist health care providers by documenting notes electronically under the direction of a licensed practitioner or physician in real time. Despite the promise of scribes, few studies have investigated their effect on clinical encounters, particularly with regard to patient-provider communication.ObjectiveThe purpose of this quasi-experimental pilot study was to understand how scribes affect patient-physician communication in primary care clinical encounters.MethodsWe employed a convergent mixed methods design and included a sample of three physician-scribe pairs and 34 patients. Patients' clinical encounters were randomly assigned to a scribe or nonscribe group. We conducted patient surveys focused on perceptions of patient-provider communication and satisfaction with encounters, video recorded clinical encounters, and conducted physician interviews about their experiences with scribes.ResultsOverall, the survey results revealed that patients across both arms reported very high satisfaction of communication with their physician, their physician's use of the EHR, and their care, with very little variability. Video recording analysis supported patient survey data by demonstrating high measures of communication among physicians in both scribed and nonscribed encounters. Furthermore, video recordings revealed that the presence of scribes had very little effect on the clinical encounter.ConclusionsFrom the patient's perspective, scribes are an acceptable addition to clinical encounters. Although they do not have much impact on patients' perceptions of satisfaction and their impact on the clinical encounter itself was minimal, their potential to reduce documentation-related burden on physicians is valuable. Physicians noted important issues related to scribes, including important considerations for implementing scribe programs, the role of scribes in patient interactions, how physicians work with scribes, characteristics of good scribes, and the role of scribes in physician workflow.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Patient experience measures are widely used to compare performance at the individual physician level. OBJECTIVE:To assess the impact of unmeasured patient characteristics on visit-level patient experience measures and the sample sizes required to reliably measure patient experience at the primary care physician (PCP) level. DESIGN:Repeated cross-sectional design. SETTING:Academic family medicine practice in California. PARTICIPANTS:One thousand one hundred forty-one adult patients attending 1319 visits with 56 PCPs (including 45 resident and 11 faculty physicians). MEASUREMENTS:Post-visit patient experience surveys including patient measures used for standard adjustment as recommend by the Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (CAHPS) Consortium and additional patient characteristics used for expanded adjustment (including attitudes toward healthcare, global life satisfaction, patient personality, current symptom bother, and marital status). RESULTS:The amount of variance in patient experience explained doubled with expanded adjustment for patient characteristics compared with standard adjustment (R2 = 20.0% vs. 9.6%, respectively). With expanded adjustment, the amount of variance attributable to the PCP dropped from 6.1% to 3.4% and the required sample size to achieve a reliability of 0.90 in the physician-level patient experience measure increased from 138 to 255 patients per physician. After ranking of the 56 PCPs by average patient experience, 8 were reclassified into or out of the top or bottom quartiles of average experience with expanded as compared to standard adjustment [14.3% (95% CI: 7.0-25.2%)]. CONCLUSIONS:Widely used methods for measuring PCP-level patient experience may not account sufficiently for influential patient characteristics. If methods were adapted to account for these characteristics, patient sample sizes for reliable between-physician comparisons may be too large for most practices to obtain.

Project description:Background and objectivesIn the general population, the quality of the patient experience with their primary care physician may influence health outcomes but this has not been evaluated in CKD. This is relevant for the growing Hispanic CKD population, which potentially faces challenges to the quality of the patient experience related to language or cultural factors. We evaluated the association between the patient experience with their primary care physician and outcomes in Hispanics with CKD.Design, setting, participants, & measurementsThis prospective observational study included 252 English- and Spanish-speaking Hispanics with entry eGFR of 20-70 ml/min per 1.73 m2, enrolled in the Hispanic Chronic Renal Insufficiency Cohort study between 2005 and 2008. Patient experience with their primary care physician was assessed by the Ambulatory Care Experiences Survey subscales: communication quality, whole-person orientation, health promotion, interpersonal treatment, and trust. Poisson and proportional hazards models were used to assess the association between the patient experience and outcomes, which included hospitalization, ESKD, and all-cause death.ResultsParticipants had a mean age of 56 years, 38% were women, 80% were primary Spanish speakers, and had a mean eGFR of 38 ml/min per 1.73 m2. Over 4.8 years (median) follow-up, there were 619 hospitalizations, 103 ESKD events, and 56 deaths. As compared with higher subscale scores, lower scores on four of the five subscales were associated with a higher adjusted rate ratio (RR) for all-cause hospitalization (communication quality: RR, 1.54; 95% confidence interval [95% CI], 1.25 to 1.90; health promotion: RR, 1.31; 95% CI, 1.05 to 1.62; interpersonal treatment: RR, 1.50; 95% CI, 1.22 to 1.85; and trust: RR, 1.57; 95% CI, 1.27 to 1.93). There was no significant association of subscales with incident ESKD or all-cause death.ConclusionsLower perceived quality of the patient experience with their primary care physician was associated with a higher risk of hospitalization.

Project description:Although previous studies suggest an association between provider burnout and suboptimal self-reported communication, no studies relate physician burnout to observed patient-physician communication behaviors.To investigate the relationship between physician burnout and observed patient-physician communication outcomes in patient-physician encounters.Longitudinal study of enrollment data from a trial of interventions to improve patient adherence to hypertension treatment.Fifteen urban community-based clinics in Baltimore, MD.Forty physicians and 235 of their adult hypertensive patients, with oversampling of ethnic minorities and poor persons. Fifty-three percent of physicians were women, and the average practice experience was 11.2 years. Among the 235 patients, 66% were women, 60% were African-American, and 90% were insured.Audiotape analysis of communication during outpatient encounters (one per patient) using the Roter Interaction Analysis System and patients' ratings of satisfaction with and trust and confidence in the physician.The median time between the physician burnout assessment and the patient encounter was 15.1 months (range 5.6-30). Multivariate analyses revealed no significant differences in physician communication based on physician burnout. However, compared with patients of low-burnout physicians, patients of high-burnout physicians gave twice as many negative rapport-building statements (incident risk ratio 2.06, 95% CI 1.58-2.86, p < 0.001). Physician burnout was not significantly associated with physician or patient affect, patient-centeredness, verbal dominance, or length of the encounter. Physician burnout was also not significantly associated with patients' ratings of their satisfaction, confidence, or trust.Physician burnout was not associated with physician communication behaviors nor with most measures of patient-centered communication. However, patients engaged in more rapport-building behaviors. These findings suggest a complex relationship between physician burnout and patient-physician communication, which should be investigated and linked to patient outcomes in future research.