Electronic Health Record Nudges and Health Care Quality and Outcomes in Primary Care: A Systematic Review.

Importance: Nudges have been increasingly studied as a tool for facilitating behavior change and may represent a novel way to modify the electronic health record (EHR) to encourage evidence-based care. Objective: To evaluate the association between EHR nudges and health care outcomes in primary care settings and describe implementation facilitators and barriers. Evidence Review: On June 9, 2023, an electronic search was performed in PubMed, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL, and Web of Science for all articles about clinician-facing EHR nudges. After reviewing titles, abstracts, and full texts, the present review was restricted to articles that used a randomized clinical trial (RCT) design, focused on primary care settings, and evaluated the association between EHR nudges and health care quality and patient outcome measures. Two reviewers abstracted the following elements: country, targeted clinician types, medical conditions studied, length of evaluation period, study design, sample size, intervention conditions, nudge mechanisms, implementation facilitators and barriers encountered, and major findings. The findings were qualitatively reported by type of health care quality and patient outcome and type of primary care condition targeted. The Risk of Bias 2.0 tool was adapted to evaluate the studies based on RCT design (cluster, parallel, crossover). Studies were scored from 0 to 5 points, with higher scores indicating lower risk of bias. Findings: Fifty-four studies met the inclusion criteria. Overall, most studies (79.6%) were assessed to have a moderate risk of bias. Most or all descriptive (eg, documentation patterns) (30 of 38) or patient-centeredness measures (4 of 4) had positive associations with EHR nudges. As for other measures of health care quality and patient outcomes, few had positive associations between EHR nudges and patient safety (4 of 12), effectiveness (19 of 48), efficiency (0 of 4), patient-reported outcomes (0 of 3), patient adherence (1 of 2), or clinical outcome measures (1 of 7). Conclusions and Relevance: This systematic review found low- and moderate-quality evidence that suggested that EHR nudges were associated with improved descriptive measures (eg, documentation patterns). Meanwhile, it was unclear whether EHR nudges were associated with improvements in other areas of health care quality, such as effectiveness and patient safety outcomes. Future research is needed using longer evaluation periods, a broader range of primary care conditions, and in deimplementation contexts.

Early Performance of the Patients Over Paperwork Initiative among Family Medicine Physicians.

OBJECTIVES: In 2019, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services began implementing the Patients Over Paperwork (POP) initiative in response to clinicians reporting burdensome documentation regulations. To date, no study has evaluated how these policy changes have influenced documentation burden. METHODS: Our data came from the electronic health records of an academic health system. Using quantile regression models, we assessed the association between the implementation of POP and clinical documentation word count using data from family medicine physicians in an academic health system from January 2017 to May 2021 inclusive. Studied quantiles included the 10th, 25th, 50th, 75th, and 90th quantiles. We controlled for patient-level (race/ethnicity, primary language, age, comorbidity burden), visit-level (primary payer, level of clinical decision making involved, whether a visit was done through telemedicine, whether a visit was for a new patient), and physician-level (sex) characteristics. RESULTS: We found that the POP initiative was associated with lower word counts across all of the quantiles. In addition, we found lower word counts among notes for private payers and telemedicine visits. Conversely, higher word counts were observed in notes that were written by female physicians, notes for new patient visits, and notes involving patients with greater comorbidity burden. CONCLUSIONS: Our initial evaluation suggests that documentation burden, as measured by word count, has declined over time, particularly following implementation of the POP in 2019. Additional research is needed to see whether the same occurs when examining other medical specialties, clinician types, and longer evaluation periods.

Merit-based incentive payment system participation and after-hours documentation among US office-based physicians: Findings from the 2021 National Electronic Health Records Survey.

BACKGROUND: After-hours documentation burden among US clinicians is often uncompensated work and has been associated with burnout, leading health systems to identify root causes and seek interventions to reduce this. A few studies have suggested quality programme participation (e.g., Merit-Based Incentive Payment System [MIPS]) was associated with a higher administrative burden. However, the association between MIPS participation and after-hours documentation has not been fully explored. Thus, this study aims to assess whether participation in the MIPS programme was independently associated with after-hours documentation burden. METHODS: We used 2021 data from the National Electronic Health Records Survey. We used a multivariable ordinal logistic regression model to assess whether MIPS participation was associated with the amount of after-hours documentation burden when controlling for other factors. We controlled for physician age, specialty, sex, number of practice locations, number of physicians, practice ownership, whether team support (e.g., scribes) is used for documentation tasks, and whether the practice accepts Medicaid patients. RESULTS: We included 1801 office-based US physician respondents with complete data for variables of interest. After controlling for other factors, MIPS participation was associated with greater odds of spending a greater number of hours on after-hours documentation (odds ratio = 1.44, 95% confidence interval 1.06-1.95). CONCLUSIONS: MIPS participation may increase after-hours documentation burden among US office-based physicians, suggesting that physicians may require additional resources to more efficiently report data.

Factors associated with nurse well-being in relation to electronic health record use: A systematic review.

OBJECTIVE: Although nurses comprise the largest group of health professionals and electronic health record (EHR) user base, it is unclear how EHR use has affected nurse well-being. This systematic review assesses the multivariable (ie, organizational, nurse, and health information technology [IT]) factors associated with EHR-related nurse well-being and identifies potential improvements recommended by frontline nurses. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, ProQuest, and Web of Science for literature reporting on EHR use, nurses, and well-being. A quality appraisal was conducted using a previously developed tool. RESULTS: Of 4583 articles, 12 met inclusion criteria. Two-thirds of the studies were deemed to have a moderate or low risk of bias. Overall, the studies primarily focused on nurse- and IT-level factors, with 1 study examining organizational characteristics. That study found worse nurse well-being was associated with EHRs compared with paper charts. Studies on nurse-level factors suggest that personal digital literacy is one modifiable factor to improving well-being. Additionally, EHRs with integrated displays were associated with improved well-being. Recommendations for improving EHRs suggested IT-, organization-, and policy-level solutions to address the complex nature of EHR-related nurse well-being. CONCLUSIONS: The overarching finding from this synthesis reveals a critical need for multifaceted interventions that better organize, manage, and display information for clinicians to facilitate decision making. Our study also suggests that nurses have valuable insight into ways to reduce EHR-related burden. Future research is needed to test multicomponent interventions that address these complex factors and use participatory approaches to engage nurses in intervention development.