Dataset Information

Implementing electronic health records (EHRs): health care provider perceptions before and after transition from a local basic EHR to a commercial comprehensive EHR.

ABSTRACT: Objective:We assessed changes in the percentage of providers with positive perceptions of electronic health record (EHR) benefit before and after transition from a local basic to a commercial comprehensive EHR. Methods:Changes in the percentage of providers with positive perceptions of EHR benefit were captured via a survey of academic health care providers before (baseline) and at 6-12 months (short term) and 12-24 months (long term) after the transition. We analyzed 32 items for the overall group and by practice setting, provider age, and specialty using separate multivariable-adjusted random effects logistic regression models. Results:A total of 223 providers completed all 3 surveys (30% response rate): 85.6% had outpatient practices, 56.5% were >45 years old, and 23.8% were primary care providers. The percentage of providers with positive perceptions significantly increased from baseline to long-term follow-up for patient communication, hospital transitions - access to clinical information, preventive care delivery, preventive care prompt, preventive lab prompt, satisfaction with system reliability, and sharing medical information (P?

SUBMITTER: Krousel-Wood M

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7646958 | biostudies-literature | 2018 Jun

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Implementing electronic health records (EHRs): health care provider perceptions before and after transition from a local basic EHR to a commercial comprehensive EHR.

Krousel-Wood Marie M McCoy Allison B AB Ahia Chad C Holt Elizabeth W EW Trapani Donnalee N DN Luo Qingyang Q Price-Haywood Eboni G EG Thomas Eric J EJ Sittig Dean F DF Milani Richard V RV

Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA 20180601 6

<h4>Objective</h4>We assessed changes in the percentage of providers with positive perceptions of electronic health record (EHR) benefit before and after transition from a local basic to a commercial comprehensive EHR.<h4>Methods</h4>Changes in the percentage of providers with positive perceptions of EHR benefit were captured via a survey of academic health care providers before (baseline) and at 6-12 months (short term) and 12-24 months (long term) after the transition. We analyzed 32 items for ...[more]

PMID: 29036503

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:The implementation of an electronic health record (EHR) with structured and standardized recording of patient data can improve data quality and reusability. Whether and how users perceive these advantages may depend on the preimplementation situation. OBJECTIVE:To determine whether the influence of implementing a structured and standardized EHR on perceived EHR use, data quality, and data reuse differed for users working with paper-based records versus a legacy EHR before implementation. METHODS:We used an electronic questionnaire to measure users' perception before implementation (2014), expected change, and perceived change after implementation (2016) on three themes. We included all health care professionals in two university hospitals in the Netherlands. Before jointly implementing the same structured and standardized EHR, one hospital used paper-based records and the other a legacy EHR. We compared perceptions before and after implementation for both centers. Additionally, we compared expected benefit with perceived benefit. RESULTS:We received 7,611 responses (4,537 before and 3,074 after implementation) of which 5,707 (75%) were from professionals reading and recording patient data. A total of 975 (13%) professionals responded to both before and after implementation questionnaires. In the formerly paper-based center staff perceived improvement in all themes after implementation. The legacy EHR center experienced deterioration of perceived EHR use and data reuse, and only one improvement in EHR use. In both centers, for half of the aspects at least 45% of responders experienced results worse than expected preimplementation. CONCLUSION:Our results indicate that the preimplementation recording practice impacts the perceived effect of the implementation of a structured and standardized EHR. For almost half of the respondents the new EHR did not meet their expectations. Especially legacy EHR centers need to investigate the expectations as these might be different and less clear cut than those in paper-based centers. These expectations need to be addressed appropriately to achieve a successful implementation.

Project description:IntroductionEffective electronic health record (EHR)-based training interventions facilitate improved EHR use for healthcare providers. One such training intervention is simulation-based training that emphasises learning actual tasks through experimentation in a risk-free environment without negative patient outcomes. EHR-specific simulation-based training can be employed to improve EHR use, thereby enhancing healthcare providers' skills and behaviours. Despite the potential advantages of this type of training, no study has identified and mapped the available evidence. To fill that gap, this scoping review will synthesise the current state of literature on EHR simulation-based training.Methods and analysisThe Arksey and O'Malley methodological framework will be employed. Three databases (PubMed, Embase and Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature) will be searched for published articles. ProQuest and Google Scholar will be searched to identify unpublished articles. Databases will be searched from inception to 29 January 2020. Only articles written in English, randomised control trials, cohort studies, cross-sectional studies and case-control studies will be considered for inclusion. Two reviewers will independently screen titles and abstracts against inclusion and exclusion criteria. Then, they will review full texts to determine articles for final inclusion. Citation chaining will be conducted to manually screen references of all included studies to identify additional studies not found by the search. A data abstraction form with relevant characteristics will be developed to help address the research question. Descriptive numerical analysis will be used to describe characteristics of included studies. Based on the extracted data, research evidence of EHR simulation-based training will be synthesised.Ethics and disseminationSince no primary data will be collected, there will be no formal ethical review. Research findings will be disseminated through publications, presentations and meetings with relevant stakeholders.

Project description:BackgroundThe prescribing of high-risk medications to older adults remains extremely common and results in potentially avoidable health consequences. Efforts to reduce prescribing have had limited success, in part because they have been sub-optimally timed, poorly designed, or not provided actionable information. Electronic health record (EHR)-based tools are commonly used but have had limited application in facilitating deprescribing in older adults. The objective is to determine whether designing EHR tools using behavioral science principles reduces inappropriate prescribing and clinical outcomes in older adults.MethodsThe Novel Uses of Designs to Guide provider Engagement in Electronic Health Records (NUDGE-EHR) project uses a two-stage, 16-arm adaptive randomized pragmatic trial with a "pick-the-winner" design to identify the most effective of many potential EHR tools among primary care providers and their patients ? 65?years chronically using benzodiazepines, sedative hypnotic ("Z-drugs"), or anticholinergics in a large integrated delivery system. In stage 1, we randomized providers and their patients to usual care (n = 81 providers) or one of 15 EHR tools (n = 8 providers per arm) designed using behavioral principles including salience, choice architecture, or defaulting. After 6?months of follow-up, we will rank order the arms based upon their impact on the trial's primary outcome (for both stages): reduction in inappropriate prescribing (via discontinuation or tapering). In stage 2, we will randomize (a) stage 1 usual care providers in a 1:1 ratio to one of the up to 5 most promising stage 1 interventions or continue usual care and (b) stage 1 providers in the unselected arms in a 1:1 ratio to one of the 5 most promising interventions or usual care. Secondary and tertiary outcomes include quantities of medication prescribed and utilized and clinically significant adverse outcomes.DiscussionStage 1 launched in October 2020. We plan to complete stage 2 follow-up in December 2021. These results will advance understanding about how behavioral science can optimize EHR decision support to improve prescribing and health outcomes. Adaptive trials have rarely been used in implementation science, so these findings also provide insight into how trials in this field could be more efficiently conducted.Trial registrationClinicaltrials.gov ( NCT04284553 , registered: February 26, 2020).

Project description:Objective:The federal electronic health record (EHR) certification process was intended to ensure a baseline level of system quality and the ability to support meaningful use criteria. We sought to assess whether there was variation across EHR vendors in the degree to which hospitals using products from those vendors were able to achieve high levels of performance on meaningful use criteria. Materials and Methods:We created a cross-sectional national hospital sample from the Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology EHR Products Used for Meaningful Use Attestation public use file and the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services Medicare EHR Incentive Program Eligible Hospitals public use file. We used regression models to assess the relationship between vendor and hospital performance on 6 Stage 2 Meaningful Use criteria, controlling for hospital characteristics. We also calculated how much variation in performance is explained by vendor choice. Results:We found significant associations between specific vendor and level of hospital performance for all 6 meaningful use criteria. Epic was associated with significantly higher performance on 5 of the 6 criteria; relationships for other vendors were mixed, with some associated with significantly worse performance on multiple criteria. EHR vendor choice accounted for between 7% and 34% of performance variation across the 6 criteria. Discussion:A nontrivial proportion of variation in hospital meaningful use performance is explained by vendor choice, and certain vendors are more often associated with better meaningful use performance than others. Our results suggest that policy-makers should improve the certification process by including more "real-world" scenario testing and provider feedback or ratings to reduce this variation. Hospitals can use these results to guide interactions with vendors. Conclusion:Vendor choice accounts for a meaningful proportion of variation in hospital meaningful use performance, and specific vendors are consistently associated with higher or lower performance across criteria.

Project description:BACKGROUND: Several barriers to the adoption of electronic medical records (EMRs) by family physicians have been discussed, including the costs of implementation, impact on work flow and loss of productivity. We examined billings and payments received before and after implementation of EMRs among primary care physicians in the province of Ontario. We also examined billings and payments before and after switching from a fee-for-service to a capitation payment model, because EMR implementation coincided with primary care reform in the province. METHODS: We used information from the Electronic Medical Record Administrative Data Linked Database (EMRALD) to conduct a retrospective before-after study. The EMRALD database includes EMR data extracted from 183 community-based family physicians in Ontario. We included EMRALD physicians who were eligible to bill the Ontario Health Insurance Plan at least 18 months before and after the date they started using EMRs and had completed a full 18-month period before Mar. 31, 2011, when the study stopped. The main outcome measures were physicians' monthly billings and payments for office visits and total annual payments received from all government sources. Two index dates were examined: the date physicians started using EMRs and were in a stable payment model (n = 64) and the date physicians switched from a fee-for-service to a capitation payment model (n = 42). RESULTS: Monthly billings and payments for office visits did not decrease after the implementation of EMRs. The overall weighted mean annual payment from all government sources increased by 27.7% after the start of EMRs among EMRALD physicians; an increase was also observed among all other primary care physicians in Ontario, but it was not as great (14.4%). There was a decline in monthly billings and payments for office visits after physicians changed payment models, but an increase in their overall annual government payments. INTERPRETATION: Implementation of EMRs by primary care physicians did not result in decreased billings or government payments for office visits. Further economic analyses are needed to measure the effects of EMR implementation on productivity and the costs of implementing an EMR system, including the costs of nonclinical work by physicians and their staff.

Project description:BACKGROUND:In 2014, the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) adopted a screening test policy for hepatitis C virus (HCV) in all "Baby Boomers" - those born between 1945 and 1965. About 1 in 12 Veterans were estimated to be infected with HCV yet approximately 34% of the birth cohort remained untested. Early HCV diagnosis and successful antiviral treatment decrease the risk of onward transmission, cirrhosis, hepatocellular carcinoma, liver transplant, and death. Implementing evidence-based HCV screening in primary care has great potential to reduce morbidity and mortality. To inform design and implementation of a quality improvement intervention, we studied primary care provider (PCP) perceptions of and experiences with HCV birth cohort testing. METHODS:We conducted a formative evaluation using qualitative semi-structured interviews guided by the integrated Promoting Action on Research Implementation in Health Services (i-PARIHS) framework. Twenty-two PCPs in six states across a large integrated US healthcare system were interviewed. Content analysis with a priori and emergent codes was performed on verbatim interview transcripts. RESULTS:We identified three themes related to primary care provider HCV testing and linkage practices, as mapped to i-PARIHS constructs: 1) evaluating cues to HCV testing (innovation/evidence), 2) framing HCV testing decisions (recipients), and 3) HCV testing and linkage to care in the new treatment era (context). The most frequently reported HCV testing cue was an electronic clinical reminder alert, followed by clinical markers and the presence of behavioral risk factors. Most PCPs saw testing as routine, but less urgent, leading to some reluctance. Providers largely saw themselves as performing guideline-concordant testing, yet no performance data were available to assess performance. Given the recent availability of new HCV medications, many PCPs were highly motivated to test and link patients to specialty care for treatment. CONCLUSIONS:Our results suggest a multi-component intervention around awareness and education, feedback of performance data, clinical reminder updates, and leadership support, would address both a significant need, and be deemed acceptable and feasible to primary care providers.

Dataset Information

Implementing electronic health records (EHRs): health care provider perceptions before and after transition from a local basic EHR to a commercial comprehensive EHR.

Publications

Implementing electronic health records (EHRs): health care provider perceptions before and after transition from a local basic EHR to a commercial comprehensive EHR.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure