Electronic Health Record Documentation Burden Crowds Out Health Information Exchange Use By Primary Care Physicians.

Although electronic health record (EHR) documentation burden is known to be associated with reduced clinician well-being and burnout, it may have even worse unintended consequences if documentation work also crowds out other high-value EHR tasks. We examined this possibility by assessing the relationship between documentation burden and a high-value but optional EHR task: the use of health information exchange (HIE) to view patient records from outside organizations. Our study took advantage of an exogenous shock to documentation time: appointment no-shows. We found that documentation time had a strong impact on HIE use, with each additional hour spent documenting resulting in a 7.1 percent reduction in the proportion of patients with an outside record viewed by the primary care physician seeing them that day. Our results point to the urgent need for policy makers to do more to reduce documentation burden.

The number of patient scheduled hours resulting in a 40-hour work week by physician specialty and setting: a cross-sectional study using electronic health record event log data.

OBJECTIVE: To quantify how many patient scheduled hours would result in a 40-h work week (PSH40) for ambulatory physicians and to determine how PSH40 varies by specialty and practice type. METHODS: We calculated PSH40 for 186 188 ambulatory physicians across 395 organizations from November 2021 through April 2022 stratified by specialty. RESULTS: Median PSH40 for the sample was 33.2 h (IQR: 28.7-36.5). PSH40 was lowest in infectious disease (26.2, IQR: 21.6-31.1), geriatrics (27.2, IQR: 21.5-32.0) and hematology (28.6, IQR: 23.6-32.6) and highest in plastic surgery (35.7, IQR: 32.8-37.7), pain medicine (35.8, IQR: 32.6-37.9) and sports medicine (36.0, IQR: 33.3-38.1). DISCUSSION: Health system leaders and physicians will benefit from data driven and transparent discussions about work hour expectations. The PSH40 measure can also be used to quantify the impact of variations in the clinical care environment on the in-person ambulatory patient care time available to physicians. CONCLUSIONS: PSH40 is a novel measure that can be generated from vendor-derived metrics and used by operational leaders to inform work expectations. It can also support research into the impact of changes in the care environment on physicians' workload and capacity.

Changes in Secure Messaging After Implementation of Billing E-Visits by Demographic Group.

This cohort study investigates the association of demographic characteristics with changes in patient portal messaging after implementation of e-visit billing.

Electronic Health Record Usability, Satisfaction, and Burnout for Family Physicians.

Importance: Electronic health record (EHR) work has been associated with decreased physician well-being. Understanding the association between EHR usability and physician satisfaction and burnout, and whether team and technology strategies moderate this association, is critical to informing efforts to address EHR-associated physician burnout. Objectives: To measure family physician satisfaction with their EHR and EHR usability across functions and evaluate the association of EHR usability with satisfaction and burnout, as well as the moderating association of 4 team and technology EHR efficiency strategies. Design, Setting, and Participants: This study uses data from a cross-sectional survey conducted from December 12, 2021, to October 17, 2022, of all family physicians seeking American Board of Family Medicine recertification in 2022. Exposure: Physicians perceived EHR usability across 6 domains, as well as adoption of 4 EHR efficiency strategies: scribes, support from other staff, templated text, and voice recognition or transcription. Main Outcomes and Measures: Physician EHR satisfaction and frequency of experiencing burnout measured with a single survey item ("I feel burned out from my work"), with answers ranging from "never" to "every day." Results: Of the 2067 physicians (1246 [60.3%] younger than 50 years; 1051 men [50.9%]; and 1729 [86.0%] practicing in an urban area) who responded to the survey, 562 (27.2%) were very satisfied and 775 (37.5%) were somewhat satisfied, while 346 (16.7%) were somewhat dissatisfied and 198 (9.6%) were very dissatisfied with their EHR. Readability of information had the highest usability, with 543 physicians (26.3%) rating it as excellent, while usefulness of alerts had the lowest usability, with 262 physicians (12.7%) rating it as excellent. In multivariable models, good or excellent usability for entering data (ß = 0.09 [95% CI, 0.05-0.14]; P < .001), alignment with workflow processes (ß = 0.11 [95% CI, 0.06-0.16]; P < .001), ease of finding information (ß = 0.14 [95% CI, 0.09-0.19]; P < .001), and usefulness of alerts (ß = 0.11 [95% CI, 0.06-0.16]; P < .001) were associated with physicians being very satisfied with their EHR. In addition, being very satisfied with the EHR was associated with reduced frequency of burnout (ß = -0.64 [95% CI, -1.06 to -0.22]; P < .001). In moderation analysis, only physicians with highly usable EHRs saw improvements in satisfaction from adopting efficiency strategies. Conclusions and Relevance: In this survey study of physician EHR usability and satisfaction, approximately one-fourth of family physicians reported being very satisfied with their EHR, while another one-fourth reported being somewhat or very dissatisfied, a concerning finding amplified by the inverse association between EHR satisfaction and burnout. Electronic health record-based alerts had the lowest reported usability, suggesting EHR vendors should focus their efforts on improving alerts. Electronic health record efficiency strategies were broadly adopted, but only physicians with highly usable EHRs realized gains in EHR satisfaction from using these strategies, suggesting that EHR burden-reduction interventions are likely to have heterogenous associations across physicians with different EHRs.

Physician EHR Time and Visit Volume Following Adoption of Team-Based Documentation Support.

Importance: Physicians spend the plurality of active electronic health record (EHR) time on documentation. Excessive documentation limits time spent with patients and is associated with burnout. Organizations need effective strategies to reduce physician documentation burden; however, evidence on team-based documentation (eg, medical scribes) has been limited to small, single-institution studies lacking rigorous estimates of how documentation support changes EHR time and visit volume. Objectives: To analyze how EHR documentation time and visit volume change following the adoption of team-based documentation approaches. Design, Setting, and Participants: This national longitudinal cohort study analyzed physician-week EHR metadata from September 2020 through April 2021. A 2-way fixed-effects difference-in-differences regression approach was used to analyze changes in the main outcomes after team-based documentation support adoption. Event study regression models were used to examine variation in changes over time and stratified models to analyze the moderating role of support intensity. The sample included US ambulatory physicians using the EHR. Data were analyzed between October 2022 and September 2023. Exposure: Team-based documentation support, defined as new onset and consistent use of coauthored documentation with another clinical team member. Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcomes included weekly visit volume, EHR documentation time, total EHR time, and EHR time outside clinic hours. Results: Of 18 265 physicians, 1024 physicians adopted team-based documentation support, with 17 241 comparison physicians who did not adopt such support. The sample included 57.2% primary care physicians, 31.6% medical specialists, and 11.2% surgical specialists; 40.0% practiced in academic settings and 18.4% in outpatient safety-net settings. For adopter physicians, visit volume increased by 6.0% (2.5 visits/wk [95% CI, 1.9-3.0]; P < .001), and documentation time decreased by 9.1% (23.3 min/wk [95% CI, -30.3 to -16.2]; P < .001). Following a 20-week postadoption learning period, visits per week increased by 10.8% and documentation time decreased by 16.2%. Only high-intensity adopters (>40% of note text authored by others) realized reductions in documentation time, both for the full postadoption period (-53.9 min/wk [95% CI, -65.3 to -42.4]; 21.0% decrease; P < .001) and following the learning period (-72.2 min/wk; 28.1% decrease). Low adopters saw no meaningful change in EHR time but realized a similar increase in visit volume. Conclusions and Relevance: In this national longitudinal cohort study, physicians who adopted team-based documentation experienced increased visit volume and reduced documentation and EHR time, especially after a learning period.

Impact of response bias in three surveys on primary care providers' experiences with electronic health records.

OBJECTIVE: To identify impacts of different survey methodologies assessing primary care physicians' (PCPs') experiences with electronic health records (EHRs), we compared three surveys: the 2022 Continuous Certification Questionnaire (CCQ) from the American Board of Family Medicine, the 2022 University of California San Francisco (UCSF) Physician Health IT Survey, and the 2021 National Electronic Health Records Survey (NEHRS). MATERIALS AND METHODS: We evaluated differences between survey pairs using Rao-Scott corrected chi-square tests, which account for weighting. RESULTS: CCQ received 3991 responses from PCPs (100% response rate), UCSF received 1375 (3.6% response rate), and NEHRS received 858 (18.2% response rate). Substantial, statistically significant differences in demographics were detected across the surveys. CCQ respondents were younger and more likely to work in a health system; NEHRS respondents were more likely to work in private practice; and UCSF respondents disproportionately practiced in larger academic settings. Many EHR experience indicators were similar between CCQ and NEHRS, but CCQ respondents reported higher documentation burden. DISCUSSION: The UCSF approach is unlikely to supply reliable data. Significant demographic differences between CCQ and NEHRS raise response bias concerns, and while there were similarities in some reported EHR experiences, there were important, significant differences. CONCLUSION: Federal EHR policy monitoring and maintenance require reliable data. This test of existing and alternative sources suggest that diversified data sources are necessary to understand physicians' experiences with EHRs and interoperability. Comprehensive surveys administered by specialty boards have the potential to contribute to these efforts, since they are likely to be free of response bias.

Consistency is key: documentation distribution and efficiency in primary care.

OBJECTIVES: We analyzed the degree to which daily documentation patterns in primary care varied and whether specific patterns, consistency over time, and deviations from clinicians' usual patterns were associated with note-writing efficiency. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We used electronic health record (EHR) active use data from the Oracle Cerner Advance platform capturing hourly active documentation time for 498 physicians and advance practice clinicians (eg, nurse practitioners) for 65 152 clinic days. We used k-means clustering to identify distinct daily patterns of active documentation time and analyzed the relationship between these patterns and active documentation time per note. We determined each primary care clinician's (PCC) modal documentation pattern and analyzed how consistency and deviations were related to documentation efficiency. RESULTS: We identified 8 distinct daily documentation patterns; the 3 most common patterns accounted for 80.6% of PCC-days and differed primarily in average volume of documentation time (78.1 minutes per day; 35.4 minutes per day; 144.6 minutes per day); associations with note efficiency were mixed. PCCs with >80% of days attributable to a single pattern demonstrated significantly more efficient documentation than PCCs with lower consistency; for high-consistency PCCs, days that deviated from their usual patterns were associated with less efficient documentation. DISCUSSION: We found substantial variation in efficiency across daily documentation patterns, suggesting that PCC-level factors like EHR facility and consistency may be more important than when documentation occurs. There were substantial efficiency returns to consistency, and deviations from consistent patterns were costly. CONCLUSION: Organizational leaders aiming to reduce documentation burden should pay specific attention to the ability for PCCs to execute consistent documentation patterns day-to-day.

Physicians in ACOs report greater documentation burden.

OBJECTIVES: First, to analyze the relationship between value-based payment (VBP) program participation and documentation burden among office-based physicians. Second, to analyze the relationship between specific VBP programs (eg, accountable care organizations [ACOs]) and documentation burden. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective analyses of US office-based physicians in 2019 and 2021. METHODS: We used cross-sectional data from the National Electronic Health Records Survey to measure VBP program participation and our outcomes of reported electronic health record (EHR) documentation burden. We used ordinary least squares regression models adjusting for physician and practice characteristics to estimate the relationship between participation in any VBP program and EHR burden outcomes. We also estimated the relationship between participation in 6 distinct VBP programs and our outcomes to decompose the aggregate relationship into program-specific estimates. RESULTS: In adjusted analyses, participation in any VBP program was associated with 10.5% greater probability of reporting more than 1 hour per day of after-hours documentation time (P = .01), which corresponded to an estimated additional 11 minutes per day (P = .03). Program-specific estimates illustrated that ACO participation drove the aggregate relationship, with ACO participants reporting greater after-hours documentation time (18 additional minutes per day; P < .001), more difficulty documenting (30.6% more likely; P < .001), and more inappropriateness of time spent documenting (21.7% more likely; P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Office-based physicians participating in ACOs report greater documentation burden across several measures; the same is not true for other VBP programs. Although many ACOs relax documentation requirements for reimbursement, documentation for quality reporting and risk adjustment may lead to a net increase in burden, especially for physicians exposed to numerous programs and payers.

National Trends in Billing Secure Messages as E-Visits.

This study assesses US trends in e-visit billing using national all-payer claims.

The role of organizations in shaping physician use of electronic health records.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study was to (1) characterize organizational differences in primary care physicians' electronic health record (EHR) behavior; (2) assess within-organization consistency in EHR behaviors; and (3) identify whether organizational consistency is associated with physician-level efficiency. DATA SOURCES: EHR metadata capturing averaged weekly measures of EHR time and documentation composition from 75,124 US primary care physicians across 299 organizations between September 2020 and May 2021 were taken. EHR time measures include active time in orders, chart review, notes, messaging, time spent outside of scheduled hours, and total EHR time. Documentation composition measures include note length and percentage use of templated text or copy/paste. Efficiency is measured as the percent of visits with same-day note completion. STUDY DESIGN: All analyses are cross-sectional. Across-organization differences in EHR use and documentation composition are presented via 90th-to-10th percentile ratios of means and SDs. Multilevel modeling with post-estimation variance partitioning assesses the extent of an organizational signature-the proportion of variation in our measures attributable to organizations (versus specialty and individual behaviors). We measured organizational internal consistency for each measure via organization-level SD, which we grouped into quartiles for regression. Association between internally consistent (i.e., low SD) organizational EHR use and physician-level efficiency was assessed with multi-variable OLS models. DATA COLLECTION: Extraction from Epic's Signal platform used for measuring provider EHR efficiency. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: EHR time per visit for physicians at a 90th percentile organization is 1.94 times the average EHR time at a 10th percentile organization. There is little evidence, on average, of an organizational signature. However, physicians in organizations with high internal consistency in EHR use demonstrate increased efficiency. Physicians in organizations with the highest internal consistency (top quartile) have a 3.77 percentage point higher same-day visit closure rates compared with peers in bottom quartile organizations (95% confidence interval: 0.0142-0.0612). CONCLUSIONS: Results suggest unrealized opportunities for organizations and policymakers to support consistency in how physicians engage in EHR-supported work.

System-Level Factors and Time Spent on Electronic Health Records by Primary Care Physicians.

Importance: Primary care physicians (PCPs) spend the most time on the electronic health record (EHR) of any specialty. Thus, it is critical to understand what factors contribute to varying levels of PCP time spent on EHRs. Objective: To characterize variation in EHR time across PCPs and primary care clinics, and to describe how specific PCP, patient panel, clinic, and team collaboration factors are associated with PCPs' time spent on EHRs. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study included 307 PCPs practicing across 31 primary care clinics at Massachusetts General Hospital and Brigham and Women's Hospital during 2021. Data were analyzed from October 2022 to October 2023. Main Outcomes and Measures: Total per-visit EHR time, total per-visit pajama time (ie, time spent on the EHR between 5:30 pm to 7:00 am and on weekends), and total per-visit time on the electronic inbox as measured by activity log data derived from an EHR database. Results: The sample included 307 PCPs (183 [59.6%] female). On a per-visit basis, PCPs spent a median (IQR) of 36.2 (28.9-45.7) total minutes on the EHR, 6.2 (3.1-11.5) minutes of pajama time, and 7.8 (5.5-10.7) minutes on the electronic inbox. When comparing PCP time expenditure by clinic, median (IQR) total EHR time, median (IQR) pajama time, and median (IQR) electronic inbox time ranged from 23.5 (20.7-53.1) to 47.9 (30.6-70.7) minutes per visit, 1.7 (0.7-10.5) to 13.1 (7.7-28.2) minutes per visit, and 4.7 (4.1-5.2) to 10.8 (8.9-15.2) minutes per visit, respectively. In a multivariable model with an outcome of total per-visit EHR time per visit, an above median percentage of teamwork on orders was associated with 3.81 (95% CI, 0.49-7.13) minutes per visit fewer and having a clinic pharmacy technician was associated with 7.87 (95% CI, 2.03-13.72) minutes per visit fewer. Practicing in a community health center was associated with fewer minutes of total EHR time per visit (5.40 [95% CI, 0.06-10.74] minutes). Conclusions and Relevance: There is substantial variation in EHR time among individual PCPs and PCPs within clinics. Organization-level factors, such as team collaboration on orders, support for medication refill functions, and practicing in a community health center, are associated with lower EHR time for PCPs. These findings highlight the importance of addressing EHR burden at a systems level.

Changes in Physician Electronic Health Record Use With the Expansion of Telemedicine.

Importance: Understanding the drivers of electronic health record (EHR) burden, including EHR time and patient messaging, may directly inform strategies to address physician burnout. Given the COVID-19-induced expansion of telemedicine-now used for a substantial proportion of ambulatory encounters-its association with EHR burden should be evaluated. Objective: To measure the association of the telemedicine expansion with time spent working in the EHR and with patient messaging among ambulatory physicians before and after the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. Design, Setting, and Participants: This longitudinal cohort study analyzed weekly EHR metadata of ambulatory physicians at UCSF Health, a large academic medical center. The same EHR measures were compared for 1 year before the COVID-19 pandemic (August 2018-September 2019) with the same period 1 year after its onset (August 2020-September 2021). Multivariable regression models evaluating the association between level of telemedicine use and EHR use were then assessed after the onset of the pandemic. The sample included all physician-weeks with at least 1 scheduled half-day clinic in the 11 largest ambulatory specialties at UCSF Health. Data analyses were performed from March 1, 2022, through July 1, 2023. Exposures: Physicians' weekly modality mix of either entirely face-to-face visits, mixed modalities, or entirely telemedicine. Main Outcomes and Measures: The EHR time during and outside of patient scheduled hours (PSHs), time spent documenting (normalized per 8 PSHs), and electronic messages sent to and received from patients. Results: The study sample included 1052 physicians (437 [41.5%] men and 615 [58.5%] women) during 115 weeks, which provided 35 697 physician-week observations. Comparing the period before to the period after pandemic onset showed that physician time spent working in the EHR during PSHs increased from 4.53 to 5.46 hours per 8 PSH (difference, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.87-0.98; P < 0.001); outside of PSHs, increased from 4.29 to 5.34 hours (difference, 1.04; 95% CI, 0.95-1.14; P < 0.001); and time documenting during and outside of PSHs increased from 6.35 to 8.18 hours (difference, 1.83; 95% CI, 1.72-1.94; P < 0.001). Mean weekly messages received from patients increased from 16.76 to 30.33, and messages sent to patients increased from 13.82 to 29.83. In multivariable models, weeks with a mix of face-to-face and telemedicine (ß, 0.43; 95% CI, 0.31-0.55; P < .001) visits or entirely telemedicine (ß, 0.91; 95% CI, 0.74-1.09; P < .001) had more EHR time during PSHs than all face-to-face weeks, with similar results for EHR time outside of PSHs. There was no association between telemedicine use and messages received from patients, whereas mixed modalities (ß, -0.90; 95% CI, -1.73 to -0.08; P = .03) and all telemedicine (ß, -4.06; 95% CI, -5.19 to -2.93; P < .001) were associated with fewer messages sent to patients compared with entirely face-to-face weeks. Conclusions and Relevance: The findings of this longitudinal cohort study suggest that telemedicine is associated with greater physician time spent working in the EHR, both during and outside of scheduled hours, mostly documenting visits and not messaging patients. Health systems may need to adjust productivity expectations for physicians and develop strategies to address EHR documentation burden for physicians.

Ctrl-C: a cross-sectional study of the electronic health record usage patterns of US oncology clinicians.

Despite some positive impact, the use of electronic health records (EHRs) has been associated with negative effects, such as emotional exhaustion. We sought to compare EHR use patterns for oncology vs nononcology medical specialists. In this cross-sectional study, we employed EHR usage data for 349 ambulatory health-care systems nationwide collected from the vendor Epic from January to August 2019. We compared note composition, message volume, and time in the EHR system for oncology vs nononcology clinicians. Compared with nononcology medical specialists, oncologists had a statistically significantly greater percentage of notes derived from Copy and Paste functions but less SmartPhrase use. They received more total EHR messages per day than other medical specialists, with a higher proportion of results and system-generated messages. Our results point to priorities for enhancing EHR systems to meet the needs of oncology clinicians, particularly as related to facilitating the complex documentation, results, and therapy involved in oncology care.

Social and Medical Care Integration Practices Among Children's Hospitals.

OBJECTIVES: In response to evidence linking social risk factors and adverse health outcomes, new incentives have emerged for hospitals to screen for adverse social determinants of health (SDOH). However, little information is available about the current state of social risk-related care practices among children's hospitals. To address outstanding knowledge gaps, we sought to describe social risk-related care practices among a national sample of children's hospitals. METHODS: We analyzed responses to the 2020 American Hospital Association Annual Survey. Among children's hospitals, we calculated the prevalence of screening for social needs, strategies to address social risks/needs, partnerships with community-based organizations to address social risks/needs at the individual and community level, and rates of impact assessments of how social risk-related interventions affect outcomes. We also used χ2 tests to compare results by hospital characteristics. We weighted results to adjust for nonresponse. RESULTS: The sample included 82 children's hospitals. A total of 79.6% screened for and 96.0% had strategies to address at least 1 social risk factor, although rates varied by SDOH domain. Children's hospitals more commonly partnered with community-based organizations to address patient-level social risks than to participate in community-level initiatives. A total of 39.2% of hospitals assessed SDOH intervention effectiveness. Differences in social risk-related care practices commonly varied by hospital ownership and Medicaid population but not by region. CONCLUSIONS: We found wide variability in social risk-related care practices among children's hospitals based on the risk domain and hospital characteristics. Findings can be used to monitor whether social risk-related care practices change in the setting of new incentives.

Health Information Exchange: Understanding the Policy Landscape and Future of Data Interoperability.

OBJECTIVES: To review recent literature on health information exchange (HIE), focusing on the policy approach of five case study nations: the United States of America, the United Kingdom, Germany, Israel, and Portugal, as well as synthesize lessons learned across countries and provide recommendations for future research. METHODS: A narrative review of each nation's HIE policy frameworks, current state, and future HIE strategy. RESULTS: Key themes that emerged include the importance of both central decision-making as well as local innovation, the multiple and complex challenges of broad HIE adoption, and the varying role of HIE across different national health system structures. CONCLUSION: HIE is an increasingly important capability and policy priority as electronic health record (EHR) adoption becomes more common and care delivery is increasingly digitized. While all five case study nations have adopted some level of HIE, there are significant differences across their level of data sharing infrastructure and maturity, and each nation took a different policy approach. While identifying generalizable strategies across disparate international systems is challenging, there are several common themes across successful HIE policy frameworks, such as the importance of central government prioritization of data sharing. Finally, we make several recommendations for future research to expand the breadth and depth of the literature on HIE and guide future decision-making by policymakers and practitioners.

Variation in Family Physicians' Experiences Across Different Electronic Health Record Platforms: a Descriptive Study.

BACKGROUND: Electronic health records (EHRs) have been connected to excessive workload and physician burnout. Little is known about variation in physician experience with different EHRs, however. OBJECTIVE: To analyze variation in reported usability and satisfaction across EHRs. DESIGN: Internet-based survey available between December 2021 and October 2022 integrated into American Board of Family Medicine (ABFM) certification process. PARTICIPANTS: ABFM-certified family physicians who use an EHR with at least 50 total responding physicians. MEASUREMENTS: Self-reported experience of EHR usability and satisfaction. KEY RESULTS: We analyzed the responses of 3358 physicians who used one of nine EHRs. Epic, athenahealth, and Practice Fusion were rated significantly higher across six measures of usability. Overall, between 10 and 30% reported being very satisfied with their EHR, and another 32 to 40% report being somewhat satisfied. Physicians who use athenahealth or Epic were most likely to be very satisfied, while physicians using Allscripts, Cerner, or Greenway were the least likely to be very satisfied. EHR-specific factors were the greatest overall influence on variation in satisfaction: they explained 48% of variation in the probability of being very satisfied with Epic, 46% with eClinical Works, 14% with athenahealth, and 49% with Cerner. CONCLUSIONS: Meaningful differences exist in physician-reported usability and overall satisfaction with EHRs, largely explained by EHR-specific factors. User-centric design and implementation, and robust ongoing evaluation are needed to reduce physician burden and ensure excellent experience with EHRs.

The Health Information Technology special issue: tackling new challenges to digital transformation.

A letter from the guest editor highlights the potential for the findings in this special issue help us take steps toward realizing the promise of information technology in health care.

Association Between Billing Patient Portal Messages as e-Visits and Patient Messaging Volume.

This study evaluates the adoption of clinician billing for patient portal messages as e-visits, prompted by significant increases in patient messaging after the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic.