Assessment of EHR Efficiency Tools and Resources Associated with Physician Time Spent on the Inbox.

EHR inbox efficiency EHR use metrics inbox time primary care

Journal

Journal of general internal medicine
ISSN: 1525-1497
Titre abrégé: J Gen Intern Med
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 8605834

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
08 May 2024
Historique:
received: 25 08 2023
accepted: 02 04 2024
medline: 8 5 2024
pubmed: 8 5 2024
entrez: 8 5 2024
Statut: aheadofprint

Résumé

Physicians are experiencing an increasing burden of messaging within the electronic health record (EHR) inbox. Studies have called for the implementation of tools and resources to mitigate this burden, but few studies have evaluated how these interventions impact time spent on inbox activities. Explore the association between existing EHR efficiency tools and clinical resources on primary care physician (PCP) inbox time. Retrospective, cross-sectional study of inbox time among PCPs in network clinics affiliated with an academic health system. One hundred fifteen community-based PCPs. Inbox time, in hours, normalized to eight physician scheduled hours (IB-Time Following adjustment for physician sex as well as panel size, age, and morbidity, we observed no significant differences in inbox time for physicians with and without message triage, custom inbox QuickActions, encounter specialists, and message pools. Moreover, IB-Time Physician inbox time was not associated with existing EHR efficiency tools evaluated in this study. Yet, there may be a slight increase in inbox time among physicians in practices with larger teams.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND BACKGROUND
Physicians are experiencing an increasing burden of messaging within the electronic health record (EHR) inbox. Studies have called for the implementation of tools and resources to mitigate this burden, but few studies have evaluated how these interventions impact time spent on inbox activities.
OBJECTIVE OBJECTIVE
Explore the association between existing EHR efficiency tools and clinical resources on primary care physician (PCP) inbox time.
DESIGN METHODS
Retrospective, cross-sectional study of inbox time among PCPs in network clinics affiliated with an academic health system.
PARTICIPANTS METHODS
One hundred fifteen community-based PCPs.
MAIN MEASURES METHODS
Inbox time, in hours, normalized to eight physician scheduled hours (IB-Time
KEY RESULTS RESULTS
Following adjustment for physician sex as well as panel size, age, and morbidity, we observed no significant differences in inbox time for physicians with and without message triage, custom inbox QuickActions, encounter specialists, and message pools. Moreover, IB-Time
CONCLUSIONS CONCLUSIONS
Physician inbox time was not associated with existing EHR efficiency tools evaluated in this study. Yet, there may be a slight increase in inbox time among physicians in practices with larger teams.

Identifiants

DOI: 10.1007/s11606-024-08761-3 PMID: 38717666
pubmed: 38717666
doi: 10.1007/s11606-024-08761-3
pii: 10.1007/s11606-024-08761-3
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Informations de copyright

© 2024. The Author(s).

Références

Arndt BG, Beasley JW, Watkinson MD, et al. Tethered to the EHR: Primary Care Physician Workload Assessment Using EHR Event Log Data and Time-Motion Observations. Ann Fam Med. 2017;15(5):419-426. https://doi.org/10.1370/afm.2121
doi: 10.1370/afm.2121 pubmed: 28893811 pmcid: 5593724
Nath B, Williams B, Jeffery MM, et al. Trends in Electronic Health Record Inbox Messaging During the COVID-19 Pandemic in an Ambulatory Practice Network in New England. JAMA Netw Open. 2021;4(10):e2131490. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2021.31490
doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2021.31490 pubmed: 34636917 pmcid: 8511977
Holmgren AJ, Downing NL, Bates DW, et al. Assessment of Electronic Health Record Use Between US and Non-US Health Systems. JAMA Intern Med. 2021;181(2):251-259. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamainternmed.2020.7071
doi: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2020.7071 pubmed: 33315048
Tai-Seale M, Dillon EC, Yang Y, et al. Physicians’ Well-Being Linked To In-Basket Messages Generated By Algorithms In Electronic Health Records. Health Aff (Millwood). 2019;38(7):1073-1078. https://doi.org/10.1377/hlthaff.2018.05509
doi: 10.1377/hlthaff.2018.05509 pubmed: 31260371
Akbar F, Mark G, Prausnitz S, et al. Physician Stress During Electronic Health Record Inbox Work: In Situ Measurement With Wearable Sensors. JMIR Med Inform. 2021;9(4):e24014. https://doi.org/10.2196/24014
Adler-Milstein J, Zhao W, Willard-Grace R, Knox M, Grumbach K. Electronic Health Records and Burnout: Time Spent on the Electronic Health Record After Hours and Message Volume Associated with Exhaustion but not with Cynicism Among Primary Care Clinicians. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2020;27(4):531-538. https://doi.org/10.1093/jamia/ocz220
doi: 10.1093/jamia/ocz220 pubmed: 32016375 pmcid: 7647261
Melnick ER, Fong A, Nath B, et al. Analysis of Electronic Health Record Use and Clinical Productivity and Their Association With Physician Turnover. JAMA Netw Open. 2021;4(10):e2128790. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2021.28790
doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2021.28790 pubmed: 34636911 pmcid: 8511970
Fogg JF, Sinsky CA. In-Basket Reduction: a Multiyear Pragmatic Approach to Lessen the Work Burden of Primary Care Physicians. NEJM Catal. 2023;4(5). https://doi.org/10.1056/CAT.22.0438
Murphy DR, Giardina TD, Satterly T, Sittig DF, Singh H. An Exploration of Barriers, Facilitators, and Suggestions for Improving Electronic Health Record Inbox-Related Usability: a Qualitative Analysis. JAMA Netw Open. 2019;2(10):e1912638. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2019.12638
doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2019.12638 pubmed: 31584683 pmcid: 6784746
Murphy DR, Satterly T, Giardina TD, Sittig DF, Singh H. Practicing Clinicians’ Recommendations to Reduce Burden from the Electronic Health Record Inbox: a Mixed-Methods Study. J Gen Intern Med. 2019;34(9):1825-1832. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11606-019-05112-5
doi: 10.1007/s11606-019-05112-5 pubmed: 31292905 pmcid: 6712240
Physicians weigh in: 5 keys to fixing the EHR inbox. American Medical Association. Published December 24, 2019. Accessed May 23, 2023. https://www.ama-assn.org/practice-management/digital/physicians-weigh-5-keys-fixing-ehr-inbox
Sinsky CA, Rule A, Cohen G, et al. Metrics for Assessing Physician Activity Using Electronic Health Record Log Data. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2020;27(4):639-643. https://doi.org/10.1093/jamia/ocz223
doi: 10.1093/jamia/ocz223 pubmed: 32027360 pmcid: 7075531
Charlson ME, Pompei P, Ales KL, MacKenzie CR. A New Method of Classifying Prognostic Comorbidity in Longitudinal Studies: Development and Validation. J Chronic Dis. 1987;40(5):373-383. https://doi.org/10.1016/0021-9681(87)90171-8
doi: 10.1016/0021-9681(87)90171-8 pubmed: 3558716
Sinsky CA, Shanafelt TD, Ripp JA. The Electronic Health Record Inbox: Recommendations for Relief. J Gen Intern Med. 2022;37(15):4002-4003. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11606-022-07766-0
doi: 10.1007/s11606-022-07766-0 pubmed: 36036837 pmcid: 9640509
Sinsky CA, Privitera MR. Creating a “Manageable Cockpit” for Clinicians: a Shared Responsibility. JAMA Intern Med. 2018;178(6):741-742. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamainternmed.2018.0575
doi: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2018.0575 pubmed: 29582080
EHR Inbox Management. Accessed May 30, 2023. https://edhub.ama-assn.org/steps-forward/module/2798925
Nguyen OT, Turner K, Apathy NC, et al. Primary Care Physicians’ Electronic Health Record Proficiency and Efficiency Behaviors and Time Interacting with Electronic Health Records: a Quantile Regression Analysis. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2022;29(3):461-471. https://doi.org/10.1093/jamia/ocab272
doi: 10.1093/jamia/ocab272 pubmed: 34897493
Akbar F, Mark G, Warton EM, et al. Physicians’ Electronic Inbox Work Patterns and Factors Associated with High Inbox Work Duration. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2021;28(5):923-930. https://doi.org/10.1093/jamia/ocaa229
doi: 10.1093/jamia/ocaa229 pubmed: 33063087
Rittenberg E, Liebman JB, Rexrode KM. Primary Care Physician Gender and Electronic Health Record Workload. J Gen Intern Med. 2022;37(13):3295-3301. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11606-021-07298-z
doi: 10.1007/s11606-021-07298-z pubmed: 34993875 pmcid: 9550938

Auteurs

Richa Bundy (R)

Informatics and Analytics (I&A), Department of Internal Medicine, Wake Forest School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, USA. rbundy@wakehealth.edu.
ORCID: 0000-0002-2506-5682

Adam Moses (A)

Informatics and Analytics (I&A), Department of Internal Medicine, Wake Forest School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, USA.

Elisabeth Stambaugh (E)

Wake Forest Health Network, Atrium Health Wake Forest Baptist, Winston-Salem, NC, USA.

Paschal Stewart (P)

Wake Forest Health Network, Atrium Health Wake Forest Baptist, Winston-Salem, NC, USA.
Wake Forest Center for Biomedical Informatics (WFBMI), Wake Forest School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, USA.

Lauren Witek (L)

Informatics and Analytics (I&A), Department of Internal Medicine, Wake Forest School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, USA.

Lindsey Carlasare (L)

Professional Satisfaction and Practice Sustainability, American Medical Association, Chicago, IL, USA.

Gary Rosenthal (G)

Informatics and Analytics (I&A), Department of Internal Medicine, Wake Forest School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, USA.
General Internal Medicine (GIM), Department of Internal Medicine, Wake Forest School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, USA.

Christine Sinsky (C)

Professional Satisfaction and Practice Sustainability, American Medical Association, Chicago, IL, USA.

Ajay Dharod (A)

Informatics and Analytics (I&A), Department of Internal Medicine, Wake Forest School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, USA.
Wake Forest Center for Biomedical Informatics (WFBMI), Wake Forest School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, USA.
General Internal Medicine (GIM), Department of Internal Medicine, Wake Forest School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, USA.
Department of Implementation Science (IS), Wake Forest School of Medicine, Division of Public Health Sciences (PHS), Winston-Salem, USA.
Wake Forest Center for Healthcare Innovation (CHI), Wake Forest School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, USA.

Classifications MeSH