Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23334927›Full record

ArticleInternal and emergency medicine2013

Evaluating how electronic charting affects resident productivity.

Daniel Henning, Steven Horng, Leon Sanchez

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Internal and emergency medicine, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Review
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

3 authors.

Daniel HenningDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, One Deaconess Road, W-CC2, Boston, MA 02215, USA. dhenning@bidmc.harvard.edu
Steven Horng
Leon Sanchez

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Electronic medical records (EMRs) are becoming standard to improve the communication of information and longevity of patient records. Using an EMR in the emergency department (ED) could potentially slow residents evaluating patients. We evaluated how introducing an EMR affected resident productivity in an academic ED. We retrospectively studied first year emergency medicine residents from a large, academic, tertiary care center before-and-after the institution of an EMR on July 1st, 2010. No residents from the 2009-2010 class used the EMR, while all of the 2010-2011 residents used the EMR. We performed univariate and multivariate analyses using productivity, measured in patients per hour (pt/hr), as the primary outcome. A mixed-model multivariate regression, stratified by acuity zone, was created incorporating EMR and other possible confounders: admissions, signouts, daily ED volume, and days after July 1st for each shift. The study was granted IRB waiver of informed. We reviewed 2,405 shifts: 1,259 shifts before and 1,146 shifts after EMR implementation. When using the EMR, the univariate analysis estimated a 0.084 pt/hr increase in the high acuity zone (p = 0.1317) and 0.029 pt/hr decrease (p = 0.7085) in the low acuity zone. The multivariate regression estimated a 0.038 pt/hr increase (p = 0.3413) in the high acuity zone and a 0.009 pt/hr increase (p = 0.9049) in the low acuity zone with the EMR. Despite the expectation that electronic charting is detrimental to resident productivity, our analyses do not suggest a significant relationship between resident productivity and using the EMR.

Indexed as

Efficiency, OrganizationalInternship and ResidencyMedical Records Systems, ComputerizedEmergency MedicineHumansMassachusettsRetrospective Studies

Identifiers

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.