Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25495926›Full record

ArticleBMC medical informatics and decision making2014

Stage 1 of the meaningful use incentive program for electronic health records: a study of readiness for change in ambulatory practice settings in one integrated delivery system.

Christopher M Shea, Kristin L Reiter, Mark A Weaver, Molly McIntyre, Jason Mose, Jonathan Thornhill, Robb Malone, Bryan J Weiner

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medical informatics and decision making, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
8.8field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 24 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. 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

8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Christopher M SheaDepartment of Health Policy and Management, University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA. chris_shea@unc.edu.
Kristin L ReiterDepartment of Health Policy and Management, University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA. reiter@email.unc.edu.
Mark A WeaverSchool of Medicine and Department of Biostatistics, University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA. mark_weaver@med.unc.edu.
Molly McIntyreCareFirst BlueCross BlueShield, Baltimore, MD, USA. mmcintyr@gmail.com.
Jason MoseDepartment of Health Policy and Management, University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA. mose@email.unc.edu.
Jonathan ThornhillUNC Faculty Physicians, Department of Practice Quality and Innovation, UNC Health Care, Chapel Hill, NC, USA. jonathan_thornhill@unchealthcare.org.
Robb MaloneUNC Faculty Physicians, Department of Practice Quality and Innovation, UNC Health Care, Chapel Hill, NC, USA. robb_malone@unchealthcare.org.
Bryan J WeinerDepartment of Health Policy and Management, University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA. weiner@email.unc.edu.
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill · USUniversity of North Carolina Health Care · US

Funding

North Carolina Translational & Clinical Sciences Institute (NC TraCS)UL1TR001111 · NCATS · UNIV OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL · PI BUSE, JOHN BERNARD, CAREY, TIMOTHY S · 2013 to 2017
$43.9M
North Carolina Translational & Clinical Sciences Institute (NC TraCS)KL2TR001109 · NCATS · UNIV OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL · PI BUSE, JOHN BERNARD, CAREY, TIMOTHY S · 2013 to 2017
$5.7M
NCATS NIH HHS KL2 TR001109NCATS NIH HHS KL2TR001109NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR001111NCATS NIH HHS UL1TR001111
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMeaningful Use (MU) provides financial incentives for electronic health record (EHR) implementation. EHR implementation holds promise for improving healthcare delivery, but also requires substantial changes for providers and staff. Establishing readiness for these changes may be important for realizing potential EHR benefits. Our study assesses whether provider/staff perceptions about the appropriateness of MU and their departments' ability to support MU-related changes are associated with their reported readiness for MU-related changes.

methodsWe surveyed providers and staff representing 47 ambulatory practices within an integrated delivery system. We assessed whether respondent's role and practice-setting type (primary versus specialty care) were associated with reported readiness for MU (i.e., willingness to change practice behavior and ability to document actions for MU) and hypothesized predictors of readiness (i.e., perceived appropriateness of MU and department support for MU). We then assessed associations between reported readiness and the hypothesized predictors of readiness.

resultsIn total, 400 providers/staff responded (response rate approximately 25%). Individuals working in specialty settings were more likely to report that MU will divert attention from other patient-care priorities (12.6% vs. 4.4%, p = 0.019), as compared to those in primary-care settings. As compared to advanced-practice providers and nursing staff, physicians were less likely to have strong confidence in their department's ability to solve MU implementation problems (28.4% vs. 47.1% vs. 42.6%, p = 0.023) and to report strong willingness to change their work practices for MU (57.9% vs. 83.3% vs. 82.0%, p < 0.001). Finally, provider/staff perceptions about whether MU aligns with departmental goals (OR = 3.99, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 2.13 to 7.48); MU will divert attention from other patient-care priorities (OR = 2.26, 95% CI = 1.26 to 4.06); their department will support MU-related change efforts (OR = 3.99, 95% CI = 2.13 to 7.48); and their department will be able to solve MU implementation problems (OR = 2.26, 95% CI = 1.26 to 4.06) were associated with their willingness to change practice behavior for MU.

conclusionsOrganizational leaders should gauge provider/staff perceptions about appropriateness and management support of MU-related change, as these perceptions might be related to subsequent implementation.

Indexed as

Reimbursement, IncentiveAmbulatory CareAttitude of Health PersonnelCenters for Medicare and Medicaid Services, U.S.Delivery of Health Care, IntegratedElectronic Health RecordsHealth Care SurveysHealth Plan ImplementationHumansMeaningful UseNorth CarolinaOrganizational InnovationUnited States

Identifiers

PMID25495926
PMCPMC4272806
OpenAlexW2038096156

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.