Association Between Electronic Health Record Time and Quality of Care Metrics in Primary Care.

Importance: Physicians across the US spend substantial time working in the electronic health record (EHR), with primary care physicians (PCPs) spending the most time. The association between EHR time and ambulatory care quality outcomes is unclear. Objective: To characterize measures of EHR use and ambulatory care quality performance among PCPs. Design, Setting, and Participants: A cross-sectional study of PCPs with longitudinal patient panels using a single EHR vendor was conducted at Brigham and Women's Hospital and Massachusetts General Hospital during calendar year 2021. Exposures: Independent variables included PCPs demographic and practice characteristics and EHR time measures (PCP-level mean of daily total EHR time, after-hours time, time from 5:30 pm to 7:00 am and time on weekends, and daily EHR time on notes, sending and receiving patient, staff, results, prescription, or system messages [in-basket], and clinical review). Main Outcomes and Measures: Outcome variables were ambulatory quality measures (year-end, PCP panel-level achievement of targets for hemoglobin A1c level control, lipid management, hypertension control, diabetes screening, and breast cancer screening). Results: The sample included 291 physicians (174 [59.8%] women). Median panel size was 829 (IQR, 476-1157) patients and mean (SD) clinical full-time equivalent was 0.54 (0.27). The PCPs spent a mean (SD) of 145.9 (64.6) daily minutes on the EHR. There were significant associations between EHR time and panel-level achievement of hemoglobin A1c control, hypertension control, and breast cancer screening targets. In adjusted analyses, each additional 15 minutes of total daily EHR time was associated with 0.58 (95% CI, 0.32-0.84) percentage point greater panel-level hemoglobin A1c control, 0.52 (95% CI, 0.33-0.71) percentage point greater hypertension control, and 0.28 (95% CI, 0.05-0.52) higher breast cancer screening rates. Each daily additional 15 minutes of in-basket time was associated with 2.26 (95% CI, 1.05-3.48) greater panel-wide hemoglobin A1c control, 1.65 (95% CI, 0.83-2.47) percentage point greater hypertension control, and 1.26 (95% CI, 0.51-2.02) percentage point higher breast cancer screening rates. Associations were largely concentrated among PCPs with 0.5 clinical full-time equivalent or less. There were no associations between EHR use metrics and diabetes screening or lipid management in patients with cardiovascular disease. Conclusions and Relevance: This cross-sectional study found an association between EHR time and some measures of ambulatory care quality. Although increased EHR time is associated with burnout, it may represent a level of thoroughness or communication that enhances certain outcomes. It may be useful for future studies to characterize payment models, workflows, and technologies that enable high-quality ambulatory care delivery while minimizing EHR burden.

Health systems as venture capital investors in digital health: 2011-2019.

Provider health systems as venture capital investors in digital health are uniquely positioned in the industry. Little is known about the volume or characteristics of their investments and how these compare to other investors. From 2011 to 2019, we found that health systems made 184 investments in 105 companies. Compared with other investors, they were more likely to invest in companies focused on workflow, on-demand health services, and data infrastructure/interoperability.

Physician Beliefs about the Meaningful Use of the Electronic Health Record: A Follow-Up Study.

Background There is continuing interest in how physicians are responding to the meaningful use of the electronic health record (EHR) incentive program. However, little research has been done on physician beliefs about the meaningful use of the EHR. Objective This study aims to conduct a follow-up study of physician beliefs about the meaningful use of the EHR. Methods Online survey of physicians at two academic medical centers (AMCs) in the northeast who were participating in the meaningful use of the EHR incentive program and were using an internally developed EHR was conducted. Results Of the 2,033 physicians surveyed, 1,075 completed the survey for an overall response rate of 52.9%. Only one-fifth (20.5%) of the physicians agreed or strongly agreed that meaningful use of the EHR would help them improve quality of care, and only a quarter (25.2%) agreed or strongly agreed that the meaningful use of the EHR would improve the care that their organization delivers. Physician satisfaction with the outpatient EHR was the strongest predictor of self-efficacy with achieving stage 2 of the meaningful use of the EHR incentive program (odds ratio: 2.10, 95% confidence interval: 1.61, 2.75, p < 0.001). Physicians reported more negative beliefs in stage 2 than stage 1 across all belief items. For example, 28.1% agreed or strongly agreed that the meaningful use of the EHR would decrease medical errors in stage 2 as compared with 35.9% in stage 1 (p < 0.001). Conclusion Only one-fifth of the physicians in our study believed that the meaningful use of the EHR would improve quality of care, patient-centeredness of care, or the care they personally provide. Primary care physicians expressed more negative beliefs about the meaningful use of the EHR in stage 2 than in stage 1. These findings show that physicians continue to express negative beliefs about the meaningful use of the EHR. These ongoing negative beliefs are concerning for both implementation and policy.

Awareness and Use of the After-Visit Summary Through a Patient Portal: Evaluation of Patient Characteristics and an Application of the Theory of Planned Behavior.

BACKGROUND: Patient portals are being used to provide a clinical summary of the office visit or the after-visit summary (AVS) to patients. There has been relatively little research on the characteristics of patients who access the AVS through a patient portal and their beliefs about the AVS. OBJECTIVE: The aim was to (1) assess the characteristics of patients who are aware of and access the AVS through a patient portal and (2) apply the Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB) to predict behavioral intention of patients toward accessing the AVS provided through a patient portal. METHODS: We developed a survey capturing the components of TPB (beliefs, attitude, perceived norm, and perceived behavioral control). Over a 6-month period, patients with a patient portal account with an office visit in the previous week were identified using our organization's scheduling system. These patients were sent an email about the study and a link to the survey via their portal account. We applied univariate statistical analysis (Pearson chi-square and 1-way ANOVA) to assess differences among groups (aware/unaware of AVS and accessed/did not access AVS). We reported means and standard deviations to depict belief strengths and presented correlations between beliefs and attitude, perceived norm, and perceived behavioral control. We used hierarchical regression analysis to predict behavioral intention toward accessing the AVS through the patient portal. RESULTS: Of the 23,336 patients who were sent the survey, 5370 responded for a response rate of 23.01%. Overall, 76.52% (4109/5370) were aware that the AVS was available through the patient portal and 54.71% of those (2248/4109) accessed the AVS within 5 days of the office visit. Patients who accessed the AVS had a greater number of sessions with the portal (mean 119, SD 221.5) than those who did not access the AVS (mean 79.1, SD 123.3, P<.001); the difference was not significant for awareness of the AVS. The strongest behavioral beliefs with accessing the AVS were being able to track visits and tests (mean 2.53, SD 1.00) followed by having medical information more readily accessible (mean 2.48, SD 1.07). In all, 56.7% of the variance in intention to access the AVS through the portal was accounted for by attitude, perceived norm, and perceived behavioral control. CONCLUSIONS: Most users of a patient portal were aware that the AVS was accessible through the portal. Patients had stronger beliefs about accessing the AVS with the goal of timely and efficient access of information than with engaging in their health care. Interventions to improve patient access of the AVS can focus on providers promoting patient beliefs about the value of the AVS for tracking tests and visits, and timely and efficient access of information.

Characteristics of medicine-pediatrics practices: results from the national ambulatory medical care survey.

BACKGROUND: Combined medicine-pediatrics (med-peds) training has existed for 40 years, yet little is known about national med-peds practices. A more comprehensive understanding of med-peds practices is important to inform medical students and guide evolving curricula and accreditation standards. METHOD: The authors used data from the National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey from 2000 to 2006 to characterize the age distribution and types of visits seen by med-peds, internal medicine, pediatric, and family physicians. RESULTS: Forty-three percent of visits to med-peds physicians were from children < or = 18 years of age. Compared with family physicians, med-peds physicians saw a higher proportion of infants and toddlers < or = 2 years of age (21.0% versus 3.7%; P = .002) and children < or = 18 years of age (42.9% versus 15.5%; P = .002), but they treated fewer adults age 65 or older (13.8% versus 21.3%; P = .013). Compared with internists, med-peds physicians saw a greater percentage of visits from adults 19 to 64 years of age (75.8% versus 61.2%) and fewer visits from patients age 65 or older (24.2% versus 38.8%; P = .006). Med-peds physicians, like family physicians and pediatricians, most commonly treated patients for acute problems and reported high levels of continuity of care for patients-pediatric (93.6%) and adult (94.6%). CONCLUSIONS: Med-peds physicians care for a considerable proportion of pediatric patients while maintaining high levels of continuity of care for adult and pediatric patients. Within their practices, med-peds physicians treat a larger percentage of pediatric patients than do family physicians, but they see a smaller percentage of elderly patients.