Dataset Information

EHR Adoption and Hospital Performance: Time-Related Effects.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

To assess whether, 5 years into the HITECH programs, national data reflect a consistent relationship between EHR adoption and hospital outcomes across three important dimensions of hospital performance.

Data sources/study setting

Secondary data from the American Hospital Association and CMS (Hospital Compare and EHR Incentive Programs) for nonfederal, acute-care hospitals (2009-2012).

Study design

We examined the relationship between EHR adoption and three hospital outcomes (process adherence, patient satisfaction, efficiency) using ordinary least squares models with hospital fixed effects. Time-related effects were assessed through comparing the impact of EHR adoption pre (2008/2009) versus post (2010/2011) meaningful use and by meaningful use attestation cohort (2011, 2012, 2013, Never). We used a continuous measure of hospital EHR adoption based on the proportion of electronic functions implemented.

Data collection/extraction methods

We created a panel dataset with hospital-year observations.

Principal findings

Higher levels of EHR adoption were associated with better performance on process adherence (0.147; p < .001) and patient satisfaction (0.118; p < .001), but not efficiency (0.01; p = .78). For all three outcomes, there was a stronger, positive relationship between EHR adoption and performance in 2010/2011 compared to 2008/2009. We found mixed results based on meaningful use attestation cohort.

Conclusions

Performance gains associated with EHR adoption are apparent in more recent years. The large national investment in EHRs appears to be delivering more consistent benefits than indicated by earlier national studies.

SUBMITTER: Adler-Milstein J

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4693851 | biostudies-literature | 2015 Dec

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

EHR Adoption and Hospital Performance: Time-Related Effects.

Adler-Milstein Julia J Everson Jordan J Lee Shoou-Yih D SY

Health services research 20151016 6

<h4>Objective</h4>To assess whether, 5 years into the HITECH programs, national data reflect a consistent relationship between EHR adoption and hospital outcomes across three important dimensions of hospital performance.<h4>Data sources/study setting</h4>Secondary data from the American Hospital Association and CMS (Hospital Compare and EHR Incentive Programs) for nonfederal, acute-care hospitals (2009-2012).<h4>Study design</h4>We examined the relationship between EHR adoption and three hospita ...[more]

PMID: 26473506

Similar Datasets

Project description:ImportanceDespite the broad adoption and optimization of electronic health record (EHR) systems across the continuum of care, serious usability and safety problems persist.ObjectiveTo assess whether EHR safety performance is associated with EHR frontline user experience in a national sample of hospitals.Design, setting, and participantsThis cross-sectional study included all US adult hospitals that used the National Quality Forum Leapfrog Health IT Safety Measure and also used the ARCH Collaborative EHR User experience survey from January 1, 2017, to January 1, 2019. Data analysis was performed from September 2020 to November 2022.Main outcomes and measuresThe primary outcomes were hospital performance on the Leapfrog Health IT Safety measure (overall and 10 subcomponents) and the ARCH collaborative frontline user experience scores (overall and 8 subcomponents). Ordinary least squares models with survey responses clustered by hospital were used to assess associations between the overall measures and their subcomponents.ResultsThere were 112 hospitals and 5689 frontline user surveys included in the study. Hospitals scored a mean of 0.673 (range, 0.297-0.973) on the Leapfrog Health IT safety measure; the mean ARCH EHR user experience score was 3.377 (range, 1 [best] to 5 [worst]). The adjusted β coefficient between the overall safety score and overall user experience score was 0.011 (95% CI, 0.006-0.016). The ARCH overall score was also significantly associated with 10 subcategory scores of the Leapfrog Health IT safety score, and the overall Leapfrog score was associated with the 8 subcategory scores of the ARCH user experience score.Conclusions and relevanceThis cross-sectional study found a positive association between frontline user-rated EHR usability and EHR safety performance. This finding suggests that improving EHR usability, which is a current well-known pain point for EHR users, could have direct benefits in terms of improved EHR safety.

Project description:ObjectiveTo test for correlation between the growth in adoption of ambulatory electronic health records (EHRs) in the United States during 2010-2013 and hospital admissions and readmissions for elderly Medicare beneficiaries with at least one of four common ambulatory care-sensitive conditions (ACSCs).Data sourcesSK&A Information Services Survey of Physicians, American Hospital Association General Survey and Information Technology Supplement; and the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services Chronic Conditions Data Warehouse Geographic Variation Database for 2010 through 2013.Study designFixed effects model estimated the relationship between hospital referral region (HRR) level measures of physician EHR adoption and ACSC admissions and readmissions. Analyzed rates of admissions and 30-day readmissions per beneficiary at the HRR level (restricting the denominator to beneficiaries in our sample), adjusted for differences across HRRs in Medicare beneficiary age, gender, and race. Calculated physician EHR adoption rates as the percentage of physicians in each HRR who report using EHR in ambulatory care settings.Principal findingsEach percentage point increase in market-level EHR adoption by physicians is correlated with a statistically significant decline of 1.06 ACSC admissions per 10,000 beneficiaries over the study period, controlling for the overall time trend as well as market fixed effects and characteristics that changed over time. This finding implies 26,689 fewer ACSC admissions in our study population during 2010 to 2013 that were related to physician ambulatory EHR adoption. This represents 3.2 percent fewer ACSC admissions relative to the total number of such admissions in our study population in 2010. We found no evidence of a correlation between EHR use, by either physicians or hospitals, and hospital readmissions at either the market level or hospital level.ConclusionsThis study extends knowledge about EHRs' relationship with quality of care and utilization. The results suggest a significant association between EHR use in ambulatory care settings and ACSC admissions that is consistent with policy goals to improve the quality of ambulatory care for patients with chronic conditions. The null findings for readmissions support the need for improved interoperability between ambulatory care EHRs and hospital EHRs to realize improvements in readmissions.

Project description:ObjectiveThe federal electronic health record (EHR) certification process was intended to ensure a baseline level of system quality and the ability to support meaningful use criteria. We sought to assess whether there was variation across EHR vendors in the degree to which hospitals using products from those vendors were able to achieve high levels of performance on meaningful use criteria.Materials and methodsWe created a cross-sectional national hospital sample from the Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology EHR Products Used for Meaningful Use Attestation public use file and the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services Medicare EHR Incentive Program Eligible Hospitals public use file. We used regression models to assess the relationship between vendor and hospital performance on 6 Stage 2 Meaningful Use criteria, controlling for hospital characteristics. We also calculated how much variation in performance is explained by vendor choice.ResultsWe found significant associations between specific vendor and level of hospital performance for all 6 meaningful use criteria. Epic was associated with significantly higher performance on 5 of the 6 criteria; relationships for other vendors were mixed, with some associated with significantly worse performance on multiple criteria. EHR vendor choice accounted for between 7% and 34% of performance variation across the 6 criteria.DiscussionA nontrivial proportion of variation in hospital meaningful use performance is explained by vendor choice, and certain vendors are more often associated with better meaningful use performance than others. Our results suggest that policy-makers should improve the certification process by including more "real-world" scenario testing and provider feedback or ratings to reduce this variation. Hospitals can use these results to guide interactions with vendors.ConclusionVendor choice accounts for a meaningful proportion of variation in hospital meaningful use performance, and specific vendors are consistently associated with higher or lower performance across criteria.

Project description:BackgroundCollecting, monitoring, and responding to patient-generated health data (PGHD) are associated with improved quality of life and patient satisfaction, and possibly with improved patient survival in oncology. However, the current state of adoption, types of PGHD collected, and degree of integration into electronic health records (EHRs) is unknown.MethodsThe NCCN EHR Oncology Advisory Group formed a Patient-Reported Outcomes (PRO) Workgroup to perform an assessment and provide recommendations for cancer centers, researchers, and EHR vendors to advance the collection and use of PGHD in oncology. The issues were evaluated via a survey of NCCN Member Institutions. Questions were designed to assess the current state of PGHD collection, including how, what, and where PGHD are collected. Additionally, detailed questions about governance and data integration into EHRs were asked.ResultsOf 28 Member Institutions surveyed, 23 responded. The collection and use of PGHD is widespread among NCCN Members Institutions (96%). Most centers (90%) embed at least some PGHD into the EHR, although challenges remain, as evidenced by 88% of respondents reporting the use of instruments not integrated. Forty-seven percent of respondents are leveraging PGHD for process automation and adherence to best evidence. Content type and integration touchpoints vary among the members, as well as governance maturity.ConclusionsThe reported variability regarding PGHD suggests that it may not yet have reached its full potential for oncology care delivery. As the adoption of PGHD in oncology continues to expand, opportunities exist to enhance their utility. Among the recommendations for cancer centers is establishment of a governance process that includes patients. Researchers should consider determining which PGHD instruments confer the highest value. It is recommended that EHR vendors collaborate with cancer centers to develop solutions for the collection, interpretation, visualization, and use of PGHD.

Project description:ObjectiveTo understand if providers who had additional electronic health record (EHR) training improved their satisfaction, decreased personal EHR-use time, and decreased turnaround time on tasks.Materials and methodsThis pre-post study with no controls evaluated the impact of a supplemental EHR training program on a group of academic and community practice clinicians that previously had go-live group EHR training and 20 months experience using this EHR on self-reported data, calculated EHR time, and vendor-reported metrics.ResultsProviders self-reported significant improvements in their knowledge of efficiency tools in the EHR after training and doubled (significant) their preference list entries (mean pre = 38.1 [65.88], post = 63.5 [90.47], P < .01). Of the 7 EHR satisfaction variables, only 1 self-reported variable significantly improved after training: Control over my workload in the EHR (mean pre = 2.7 [0.96], post = 3.0 [1.04], P < .01). There was no significant decrease in their calculated EHR usage outside of clinic (mean pre = 0.39 [0.77] to post = 0.37 [0.48], P = .73). No significant difference was seen in turnaround time for patient calls (mean pre = 2.3 [2.06] days, post = 1.9 [1.76] days, P = .08) and results (mean before = 4.0 [2.79] days, after = 3.2 [2.33] days, P = .03).DiscussionMultiple sources of data provide a holistic view of the provider experience in the EHR. This study suggests that individualized EHR training can improve the knowledge of EHR tools and satisfaction with their perceived control of EHR workload, however this did not translate into less Clinician Logged-In Outside Clinic (CLOC) time, a calculated metric, nor quicker turnaround on in box tasks. CLOC time emerged as a potential less-costly surrogate metric for provider satisfaction in EHR work than surveying clinicians. Further study is required to understand the cost-benefit of various interventions to decrease CLOC time.ConclusionsThis supplemental EHR training session, 20 months post go-live, where most participants elected to receive 2 or fewer sessions did significantly improve provider satisfaction with perceived control over their workload in the EHR, but it was not effective in decreasing EHR-use time outside of clinic. CLOC time, a calculated metric, could be a practical trackable surrogate for provider satisfaction (inverse correlation) with after-hours time spent in the EHR. Further study into interventions that decrease CLOC time and improve turnaround time to respond to inbox tasks are suggested next steps.

Dataset Information

EHR Adoption and Hospital Performance: Time-Related Effects.

Objective

Data sources/study setting

Study design

Data collection/extraction methods

Principal findings

Conclusions

Publications

EHR Adoption and Hospital Performance: Time-Related Effects.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets