Advertisement

Association Between Physicians’ Burden and Performance During Interactions with Electronic Health Records (EHRs)

  • Natalie Grace Castellano
  • Prithima Mosaly
  • Lukasz MazurEmail author
Conference paper
Part of the Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing book series (AISC, volume 953)

Abstract

Suboptimal usability within electronic health records (EHRs) can pose risks for patient safety. This study uses data collected in a simulated environment in which providers interacted with ‘current’ and ‘enhanced’ Epic EHR interfaces to manage patients’ test results and missed appointments. Interactions were quantified and categorized by high or low burden in terms of displayed behavioral and physiological data. Using recorded video data, providers’ workflow and performance was analyzed. Suboptimal performance was found to be associated with high burden levels.

Keywords

Usability Electronic health record (EHR) Burden Patient safety 

References

  1. 1.
    Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology: Non-federal acute care hospital electronic health record adoption. https://dashboard.healthit.gov/quickstats/pages/FIG-Hospital-EHR-Adoption.php (May 2016)
  2. 2.
    Bates, D.W., Leape, L.L., Cullen, D.J., Laird, N., Petersen, L.A., Teich, J.M., Burdick, E., Hickey, M., Kleefield, S., Shea, B., Vander Vliet, M., Seger, D.L.: Effect of computerized physician order entry and a team intervention on prevention of serious medication errors. J. Am. Med. Assoc. 280(15), 1311–1316 (1998).  https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.280.15.1311CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Elnahal, S.M., Joynt, K.E., Bristol, S.J., Jha, A.K.: Electronic health record functions differ between best and worst hospitals. Am. J. Manag. Care 17(4), e121–e147 (2011)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Blumenthal, D., Glaser, J.P.: Information technology comes to medicine. N. Engl. J. Med. 356(24), 2527–2534 (2007).  https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMhpr066212CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Institute of Medicine (US) Committee on Data Standards for Patient Safety: Key capabilities of an electronic health record system: letter report. Natl. Acad. Sci., 1–35 (2003). https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK221800/
  6. 6.
    Thakkar, M., Davis, D.C.: Risks, barriers, and benefits of EHR systems: a comparative study based on size of hospital. Perspect. Health Inf. Manag. 3, 5 (2006)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Au, L., Oster, A., Yeh, G.H., Magno, J., Paek, H.M.: Utilizing an electronic health record system to improve vaccination coverage in children. Appl. Clin. Inform. 1(3), 221–231 (2010).  https://doi.org/10.4338/ACI-2009-12-CR-0028CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Hydari, M.Z., Telang, R., Marella, W.M.: Electronic health records and patient safety. Commun. ACM 58(11), 30–32 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Jha, A.K., DesRoches, C.M., Campbell, E.G., Donelan, K., Rao, S.R., Ferris, T.G., Shields, A., Rosenbaum, S., Blumenthal, D.: Use of electronic health records in US hospitals. N. Engl. J. Med. 360(16), 1628–1638 (2009).  https://doi.org/10.1056/nejmsa0900592CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Leape, L.L.: Errors in medicine. Clin. Chim. Acta 404(1), 2–5 (2009).  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cca.2009.03.020CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Institute of Medicine: Health IT and patient safety: building safer systems for better care. http://www.nationalacademies.org/hmd/~/media/Files/Report%20Files/2011/Health-IT/HealthITandPatientSafetyreportbrieffinal_new.pdf (November 2011)
  12. 12.
    Rose, A.F., Schnipper, J.L., Park, E.R., Poon, E.G., Li, Q., Middleton, B.: Using qualitative studies to improve the usability of an EMR. J. Biomed. Inform. 38(1), 51–60 (2005).  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbi.2004.11.006CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Ash, J.S., Berg, M., Coiera, E.: Some unintended consequences of information technology in health care: the nature of patient care information system-related errors. J. Am. Medical Inf. Assoc.: JAMIA 11(2), 104–112 (2004).  https://doi.org/10.1197/jamia.M1471CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Mazur, L.M., Mosaly, P.R., Moore, C., Comitz, E., Yu, F., Falchook, A.D., Eblan, M.J., Hoyle, L.M., Tracton, G., Chera, B.S., Marks, L.B.: Toward a better understanding of task demands, workload, and performance during physician-computer interactions. J. Am. Med. Inf. Assoc. 23(6), 1113–1120 (2016).  https://doi.org/10.1093/jamia/ocw016CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Mosaly, P.R., Mazur, L.M., Yu, F., Guo, H., Merck, D., Laidlaw, D.H., Moore, C., Marks, L.B., Mostafa, J.: Relating task demand, mental effort and task difficulty with physicians’ performance during interactions with electronic health records (EHRs). Int. J. Hum Comput Interact. 34(5), 467–475 (2018).  https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2017.1365459CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Peckham, C., Kane, L.: Medscape EHR report 2016: physicians rate top EHRs. In: Rosensteel, S. (ed.). https://www.medscape.com/features/slideshow/public/ehr2016#page=5. 25 Aug 2016

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  • Natalie Grace Castellano
    • 1
  • Prithima Mosaly
    • 1
    • 2
    • 3
  • Lukasz Mazur
    • 1
    • 2
    • 3
    Email author
  1. 1.School of Information and Library ScienceUniversity of North CarolinaChapel HillUSA
  2. 2.Carolina Health Informatics ProgramUniversity of North CarolinaChapel HillUSA
  3. 3.Division of Healthcare Engineering, Department of Radiation OncologyUniversity of North CarolinaChapel HillUSA

Personalised recommendations