Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27375293›Full record

ArticleJournal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA2017

The electronic health record audit file: the patient is waiting.

Annemarie G Hirsch, J B Jones, Virginia R Lerch, Xiaoqin Tang, Andrea Berger, Deserae N Clark, Walter F Stewart

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Learning Tasks of Pediatric Providers from Electronic Health Record Audit Logs.AMIA ... Annual Symposium proceedings. AMIA Symposium · 2020
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Secondary use of electronic health record data for clinical workflow analysis.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2018
    Article
  11. 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

7 authors.

Annemarie G HirschCenter for Health Research, Geisinger Health System, Danville, Pennsylvania.
J B JonesResearch Development and Dissemination, Sutter Health, San Francisco, California.
Virginia R LerchInstitute for Advanced Applications, Geisinger Health System, Danville, Pennsylvania.
Xiaoqin TangAllegheny Health Network, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.
Andrea BergerCenter for Health Research, Geisinger Health System, Danville, Pennsylvania.
Deserae N ClarkDepartment of Clinical Innovation, Geisinger Health System, Danville, Pennsylvania.
Walter F StewartResearch Development and Dissemination, Sutter Health, San Francisco, California.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveWe describe how electronic health record (EHR) audit files can be used to understand how time is spent in primary care (PC). MATERIALS/

methodsWe used audit file data from the Geisinger Clinic to quantify elements of the clinical workflow and to determine how these times vary by patient and encounter factors. We randomly selected audit file records representing 36 437 PC encounters across 26 clinic locations. Audit file data were used to estimate duration and variance of: (1) time in the waiting room, (2) nurse time with the patient, (3) time in the exam room without a nurse or physician, and (4) physician time with the patient. Multivariate modeling was used to test for differences by patient and by encounter features.

resultsOn average, a PC encounter took 54.6 minutes, with 5 minutes of nurse time, 15.5 minutes of physician time, and the remaining 62% of the time spent waiting to see a clinician or check out. Older age, female sex, and chronic disease were associated with longer wait times and longer time with clinicians. Level of service and numbers of medications, procedures, and lab orders were associated with longer time with clinicians. Late check-in and same-day visits were associated with shorter wait time and clinician time.

conclusionsThis study provides insights on uses of audit file data for workflow analysis during PC encounters. DISCUSSION: Scalable ways to quantify clinical encounter workflow elements may provide the means to develop more efficient approaches to care and improve the patient experience.

Indexed as

Electronic Health RecordsWorkflowAmbulatory Care FacilitiesHealth Services ResearchHumansLinear ModelsNursesPennsylvaniaPhysiciansPrimary Health CareQuality ControlRetrospective Studieselectronic health recordsprimary health careworkflow

Identifiers

PMID27375293
PMCPMC7651927

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.