Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22926633›Full record

ArticleJournal of general internal medicine2013

Electronic health record impact on work burden in small, unaffiliated, community-based primary care practices.

Jenna Howard, Elizabeth C Clark, Asia Friedman, Jesse C Crosson, Maria Pellerano, Benjamin F Crabtree, Ben-Tzion Karsh, Carlos R Jaen, Douglas S Bell, Deborah J Cohen

Abstract readMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of general internal medicine, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 46 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
46citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

46 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors.

Jenna HowardDepartment of Family Medicine and Community Health, UMDNJ-Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, Somerset, NJ, USA. howardje@umdnj.edu
Elizabeth C Clark
Asia Friedman
Jesse C Crosson
Maria Pellerano
Benjamin F Crabtree
Ben-Tzion Karsh
Carlos R Jaen
Douglas S Bell
Deborah J Cohen

Funding

Integrating Practice & Community Cancer ControlK05CA140237 · NCI · UNIV OF MED/DENT NJ-R W JOHNSON MED SCH · PI CRABTREE, BENJAMIN F · 2009 to 2013
$851k
Cardiovascular Disease Care and EMR Use in Community-based Primary Care PracticesR21HL092046 · NHLBI · UNIV OF MED/DENT NJ-R W JOHNSON MED SCH · PI COHEN, DEBORAH JILL · 2009 to 2010
$429k
NCI NIH HHS K05 CA140237NHLBI NIH HHS R21 HL092046NHLBI NIH HHS R21HL092046
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe use of electronic health records (EHR) is widely recommended as a means to improve the quality, safety and efficiency of US healthcare. Relatively little is known, however, about how implementation and use of this technology affects the work of clinicians and support staff who provide primary health care in small, independent practices.

objectiveTo study the impact of EHR use on clinician and staff work burden in small, community-based primary care practices.

designWe conducted in-depth field research in seven community-based primary care practices. A team of field researchers spent 9-14 days over a 4-8 week period observing work in each practice, following patients through the practices, conducting interviews with key informants, and collecting documents and photographs. Field research data were coded and analyzed by a multidisciplinary research team, using a grounded theory approach.

participantsAll practice members and selected patients in seven community-based primary care practices in the Northeastern US. KEY

resultsThe impact of EHR use on work burden differed for clinicians compared to support staff. EHR use reduced both clerical and clinical staff work burden by improving how they check in and room patients, how they chart their work, and how they communicate with both patients and providers. In contrast, EHR use reduced some clinician work (i.e., prescribing, some lab-related tasks, and communication within the office), while increasing other work (i.e., charting, chronic disease and preventive care tasks, and some lab-related tasks). Thoughtful implementation and strategic workflow redesign can mitigate the disproportionate EHR-related work burden for clinicians, as well as facilitate population-based care.

conclusionsThe complex needs of the primary care clinician should be understood and considered as the next iteration of EHR systems are developed and implemented.

Indexed as

Electronic Health RecordsCommunity Health ServicesHealth Services ResearchHumansPrimary Health CareQualitative ResearchUnited StatesWorkload

Identifiers

PMID22926633
PMCPMC3539023

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.