Dataset Information

Physicians' gender and their use of electronic health records: findings from a mixed-methods usability study.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

Physician burnout associated with EHRs is a major concern in health care. A comprehensive assessment of differences among physicians in the areas of EHR performance, efficiency, and satisfaction has not been conducted. The study sought to study relationships among physicians' performance, efficiency, perceived workload, satisfaction, and usability in using the electronic health record (EHR) with comparisons by age, gender, professional role, and years of experience with the EHR.

Materials and methods

Mixed-methods assessments of the medical intensivists' EHR use and perceptions. Using simulated cases, we employed standardized scales, performance measures, and extensive interviews. NASA Task Load Index (TLX), System Usability Scale (SUS), and Questionnaire on User Interface Satisfaction surveys were deployed.

Results

The study enrolled 25 intensive care unit (ICU) physicians (11 residents, 9 fellows, 5 attendings); 12 (48%) were men, with a mean age of 33 (range, 28-55) years and a mean of 4 (interquartile range, 2.0-5.5) years of Epic experience. Overall task performance scores were similar for men (90% ± 9.3%) and women (92% ± 4.4%), with no statistically significant differences (P?=?.374). However, female physicians demonstrated higher efficiency in completion time (difference?=?7.1 minutes; P?=?.207) and mouse clicks (difference?=?54; P?=?.13). Overall, men reported significantly higher perceived EHR workload stress compared with women (difference?=?17.5; P?ConclusionsAmong ICU physicians, we measured significant gender-based differences in perceived EHR workload stress, satisfaction, and usability-corresponding to objective patterns in EHR efficiency. Understanding the reasons for these differences may help reduce burnout and guide improvements to physician performance, efficiency, and satisfaction with EHR use.

Design

Mixed-methods assessments of the medical intensivists' EHR use and perceptions. Using simulated cases, we employed standardized scales, performance measures, and extensive interviews.

SUBMITTER: Khairat S

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7647147 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Dec

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Physicians' gender and their use of electronic health records: findings from a mixed-methods usability study.

Khairat Saif S Coleman Cameron C Ottmar Paige P Bice Thomas T Koppel Ross R Carson Shannon S SS

Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA 20191201 12

<h4>Objective</h4>Physician burnout associated with EHRs is a major concern in health care. A comprehensive assessment of differences among physicians in the areas of EHR performance, efficiency, and satisfaction has not been conducted. The study sought to study relationships among physicians' performance, efficiency, perceived workload, satisfaction, and usability in using the electronic health record (EHR) with comparisons by age, gender, professional role, and years of experience with the EHR ...[more]

PMID: 31504578

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThe electronic health record (EHR) contains a wealth of clinical data that may be used to streamline the identification of potential clinical trial participants. However, there is little empirical information on site-level facilitators of and barriers to optimal use of EHR systems with respect to trial recruitment.MethodsWe conducted qualitative focus groups and quantitative surveys as part of the EHR Ancillary Study, which is being conducted alongside the multicenter, global, Harmony Outcomes Trial comparing albiglutide to standard care for the prevention of cardiovascular events in type 2 diabetes. Subject matter experts used findings from focus groups to draft a 20-question survey examining the use of the EHR for participant identification, common site recruitment strategies, and variation in perceived barriers to optimal use of the EHR. The final survey was fielded with 446 site investigators actively enrolling participants in the main trial.ResultsNearly two-thirds of respondents were study coordinators (63.2%), 23.1% were principal investigators, and 13.7% held other research roles. Approximately half of the respondents reported using the EHR to find potential trial participants. Of these, 79.4% reported using EHR searches in conjunction with other recruitment methods, including reviewing of upcoming clinic schedules (75.3%) and contacting past trial participants (71.2%). Important barriers to optimal use of the EHR included the lack of availability of certain research-focused EHR modules and limitations on the ability to contact patients cared for by other providers. Of survey respondents who did not use the EHR to find potential participants, one-quarter reported that the EHR was not accessible in their country; this finding varied from 2.6% of respondents in North America to 50% of respondents in the Asia Pacific.ConclusionsWhile EHR screening was commonly used for recruitment in a cardiovascular outcomes trial, important technical, governance, and regulatory barriers persist. Multifaceted, scalable, and customizable strategies are needed to support the optimal use of the EHR for trial participant identification.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT02465515. Registered on 8 June 2015.

Project description:BackgroundWhile concerns remain regarding Electronic Medical Records (EMR) use impeding doctor-patient communication, resident and faculty patient perspectives post-widespread EMR adoption remain largely unexplored.ObjectiveWe aimed to describe patient perspectives of outpatient resident and faculty EMR use and identify positive and negative EMR use examples to promote optimal utilization.DesignThis was a prospective mixed-methods study.ParticipantsInternal medicine faculty and resident patients at the University of Chicago's primary care clinic participated in the study.ApproachIn 2013, one year after EMR implementation, telephone interviews were conducted with patients using open-ended and Likert style questions to elicit positive and negative perceptions of EMR use by physicians. Interview transcripts were analyzed qualitatively to develop a coding classification. Satisfaction with physician EMR use was examined using bivariate statistics.ResultsIn total, 108 interviews were completed and analyzed. Two major themes were noted: (1) Clinical Functions of EMR and (2) Communication Functions of EMR; as well as six subthemes: (1a) Clinical Care (i.e., clinical efficiency), (1b) Documentation (i.e., proper record keeping and access), (1c) Information Access, (1d) Educational Resource, (2a) Patient Engagement and (2b) Physical Focus (i.e., body positioning). Overall, 85 % (979/1154) of patient perceptions of EMR use were positive, with the majority within the "Clinical Care" subtheme (n?=?218). Of negative perceptions, 66 % (115/175) related to the "Communication Functions" theme, and the majority of those related to the "Physical Focus" subtheme (n?=?71). The majority of patients (90 %, 95/106) were satisfied with physician EMR use: 59 % (63/107) reported the computer had a positive effect on their relationship and only 7 % (8/108) reported the EMR made it harder to talk with their doctors.ConclusionsDespite concerns regarding EMRs impeding doctor-patient communication, patients reported largely positive perceptions of the EMR with many patients reporting high levels of satisfaction. Future work should focus on improving doctors "physical focus" when using the EMR to redirect towards the patient.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Primary care needs to be patient-centered, integrated, and interprofessional to help patients with complex needs manage the burden of medication-related problems. Considering the growing problem of polypharmacy, increasing attention has been paid to how and when medication-related decisions should be coordinated across multidisciplinary care teams. Improved knowledge on how integrated electronic health records (EHRs) can support interprofessional shared decision-making for medication therapy management is necessary to continue improving patient care. OBJECTIVE:The objective of our study was to examine how physicians and pharmacists understand and communicate patient-focused medication information with each other and how this knowledge can influence the design of EHRs. METHODS:This study is part of a broader cross-Canada study between patients and health care providers around how medication-related decisions are made and communicated. We visited community pharmacies, team-based primary care clinics, and independent-practice family physician clinics throughout Ontario, Nova Scotia, Alberta, and Quebec. Research assistants conducted semistructured interviews with physicians and pharmacists. A modified version of the Multidisciplinary Framework Method was used to analyze the data. RESULTS:We collected data from 19 pharmacies and 9 medical clinics and identified 6 main themes from 34 health care professionals. First, Interprofessional Shared Decision-Making was not occurring and clinicians made decisions based on their understanding of the patient. Physicians and pharmacists reported indirect Communication, incomplete Information specifically missing insight into indication and adherence, and misaligned Processes of Care that were further compounded by EHRs that are not designed to facilitate collaboration. Scope of Practice examined professional and workplace boundaries for pharmacists and physicians that were internally and externally imposed. Physicians decided on the degree of the Physician-Pharmacist Relationship, often predicated by colocation. CONCLUSIONS:We observed limited communication and collaboration between primary care providers and pharmacists when managing medications. Pharmacists were missing key information around reason for use, and physicians required accurate information around adherence. EHRs are a potential tool to help clinicians communicate information to resolve this issue. EHRs need to be designed to facilitate interprofessional medication management so that pharmacists and physicians can move beyond task-based work toward a collaborative approach.

Project description:BackgroundAlcohol misuse is an important cause of premature disability and death. While clinicians are recommended to ask patients about alcohol use and provide brief interventions and specialist referral, this is poorly implemented in routine practice. We undertook a national consultation to ascertain the appropriateness of proposed standards for recording information about alcohol use in electronic health records (EHRs) in the UK and to identify potential barriers and facilitators to their implementation in practice.MethodsA wide range of stakeholders in the UK were consulted about the appropriateness of proposed information standards for recording alcohol use in EHRs via a multi-disciplinary stakeholder workshop and online survey. Responses to the survey were thematically analysed using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research.ResultsThirty-one stakeholders participated in the workshop and 100 in the online survey. This included patients and carers, healthcare professionals, researchers, public health specialists, informaticians, and clinical information system suppliers. There was broad consensus that the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT) and AUDIT-Consumption (AUDIT-C) questionnaires were appropriate standards for recording alcohol use in EHRs but that the standards should also address interventions for alcohol misuse. Stakeholders reported a number of factors that might influence implementation of the standards, including having clear care pathways and an implementation guide, sharing information about alcohol use between health service providers, adequately resourcing the implementation process, integrating alcohol screening with existing clinical pathways, having good clinical information systems and IT infrastructure, providing financial incentives, having sufficient training for healthcare workers, and clinical leadership and engagement. Implementation of the standards would need to ensure patients are not stigmatised and that patient confidentiality is robustly maintained.ConclusionsA wide range of stakeholders agreed that use of AUDIT-C and AUDIT are appropriate standards for recording alcohol use in EHRs in addition to recording interventions for alcohol misuse. The findings of this consultation will be used to develop an appropriate information model and implementation guide. Further research is needed to pilot the standards in primary and secondary care.

Dataset Information

Physicians' gender and their use of electronic health records: findings from a mixed-methods usability study.

Objective

Materials and methods

Results

Design

Publications

Physicians' gender and their use of electronic health records: findings from a mixed-methods usability study.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets