ArticleJAMA ophthalmology2017
Time Requirements for Electronic Health Record Use in an Academic Ophthalmology Center.
Article in JAMA ophthalmology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 48 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
48 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 85 citations in OpenAlex.
- Interaction Time with Electronic Health Records: A Systematic Review.Applied clinical informatics · 2021Pooled it
- Using electronic health record audit logs to study clinical activity: a systematic review of aims, measures, and methods.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2020Pooled it
- Understanding Primary Care Physicians' Comprehension of Eye Care Notes to Improve Diabetes Care Coordination.Research square · 2026Article
- Wait times in pediatric ophthalmology clinics: Insights from a tertiary university hospital.European journal of ophthalmology · 2025Observational
- Reddit users' questions and concerns about glaucoma.International ophthalmology · 2025Article
- Assessment of Missing Data on Glaucoma Severity Among Participants in the NIH All of Us Research Program of the United States.Journal of glaucoma · 2025Article
- Reimagining clinical AI: from clickstreams to clinical insights with EHR use metadata.npj health systems · 2025Review
- SALUS-A Study on Self-Tonometry for Glaucoma Patients: Design and Implementation of the Electronic Case File.Applied clinical informatics · 2024Article
- ChatGPT and Beyond: An overview of the growing field of large language models and their use in ophthalmology.Eye (London, England) · 2024Review
- Electronic Health Record Usage Patterns Across Surgical Subspecialties.Applied clinical informatics · 2024Article
- Use of Epic Electronic Health Record System for Health Care Research: Scoping Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2023Article
- National survey of user-reported usability of electronic medical record software in ophthalmology in Germany.Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie · 2023Article
- Systematic User-centered Design of a Prototype Clinical Decision Support System for Glaucoma.Ophthalmology science · 2023Article
- Implementation of a pilot teleretinal screening protocol for hydroxychloroquine retinopathy in a Los Angeles County safety net clinic.Journal of telemedicine and telecare · 2023Article
- Disparities in eye clinic patient encounters among patients requiring language interpreter services.BMC ophthalmology · 2023Article
- Accuracy of Physician Electronic Health Record Usage Analytics using Clinical Test Cases.Applied clinical informatics · 2022Article
- Evaluating the Impact of a Point-of-Care Cardiometabolic Clinical Decision Support Tool on Clinical Efficiency Using Electronic Health Record Audit Log Data: Algorithm Development and Validation.JMIR medical informatics · 2022Article
- Challenges, facilitators and barriers to the adoption and use of a web-based national IRD registry: lessons learned from the IRD-PT registry.Orphanet journal of rare diseases · 2022Article
- Quantifying the Electronic Health Record Burden in Head and Neck Cancer Care.Applied clinical informatics · 2022Article
- Analysis on the completeness of case records of patients with penetrating ocular trauma following a multimodal intervention.Indian journal of ophthalmology · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
10 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Importance: Electronic health record (EHR) systems have transformed the practice of medicine. However, physicians have raised concerns that EHR time requirements have negatively affected their productivity. Meanwhile, evolving approaches toward physician reimbursement will require additional documentation to measure quality and cost of care. To date, little quantitative analysis has rigorously studied these topics. Objective: To examine ophthalmologist time requirements for EHR use. Design, Setting, and Participants: A single-center cohort study was conducted between September 1, 2013, and December 31, 2016, among 27 stable departmental ophthalmologists (defined as attending ophthalmologists who worked at the study institution for ≥6 months before and after the study period). Ophthalmologists who did not have a standard clinical practice or who did not use the EHR were excluded. Exposures: Time stamps from the medical record and EHR audit log were analyzed to measure the length of time required by ophthalmologists for EHR use. Ophthalmologists underwent manual time-motion observation to measure the length of time spent directly with patients on the following 3 activities: EHR use, conversation, and examination. Main Outcomes and Measures: The study outcomes were time spent by ophthalmologists directly with patients on EHR use, conversation, and examination as well as total time required by ophthalmologists for EHR use. Results: Among the 27 ophthalmologists in this study (10 women and 17 men; mean [SD] age, 47.3 [10.7] years [median, 44; range, 34-73 years]) the mean (SD) total ophthalmologist examination time was 11.2 (6.3) minutes per patient, of which 3.0 (1.8) minutes (27% of the examination time) were spent on EHR use, 4.7 (4.2) minutes (42%) on conversation, and 3.5 (2.3) minutes (31%) on examination. Mean (SD) total ophthalmologist time spent using the EHR was 10.8 (5.0) minutes per encounter (range, 5.8-28.6 minutes). The typical ophthalmologist spent 3.7 hours using the EHR for a full day of clinic: 2.1 hours during examinations and 1.6 hours outside the clinic session. Linear mixed effects models showed a positive association between EHR use and billing level and a negative association between EHR use per encounter and clinic volume. Each additional encounter per clinic was associated with a decrease of 1.7 minutes (95% CI, -4.3 to 1.0) of EHR use time per encounter for ophthalmologists with high mean billing levels (adjusted R2 = 0.42; P = .01). Conclusions and Relevance: Ophthalmologists have limited time with patients during office visits, and EHR use requires a substantial portion of that time. There is variability in EHR use patterns among ophthalmologists.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.