Difference between revisions of "EMR Benefits: Physicians"

From Clinfowiki
Jump to: navigation, search
(Created page with " === Physician Recruitment === 68% of physicians surveyed by the National Center for Health Statistics report that the implementation and use of electronic health records is...")
 
Line 14: Line 14:
 
CDDS can increase compliance with evidence-based practice by presenting the needed information to the clinician at the point of care.<ref name="Morris develop"></ref>  And while there is resistance to its use from physicians who view CDSS as an out of the box practice that is not tailored to their clinical workflow, it has been noted that incorporating factors such as patient-specific information, consideration of comorbid conditions, and organized and explicit presentation, might result in increased CDSS utilization. <ref name="Sittig Grand"> Sittig, D. F., Wright, A., Osheroff, J. A., Middleton, B., Teich, J. M., Ash, J. S., . . . Bates, D. W. (2008). Grand challenges in clinical decision support. J Biomed Inform, 41(2), 387-392. doi: 10.1016/j.jbi.2007.09.003. Retrieved from http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1532046407001049</ref>
 
CDDS can increase compliance with evidence-based practice by presenting the needed information to the clinician at the point of care.<ref name="Morris develop"></ref>  And while there is resistance to its use from physicians who view CDSS as an out of the box practice that is not tailored to their clinical workflow, it has been noted that incorporating factors such as patient-specific information, consideration of comorbid conditions, and organized and explicit presentation, might result in increased CDSS utilization. <ref name="Sittig Grand"> Sittig, D. F., Wright, A., Osheroff, J. A., Middleton, B., Teich, J. M., Ash, J. S., . . . Bates, D. W. (2008). Grand challenges in clinical decision support. J Biomed Inform, 41(2), 387-392. doi: 10.1016/j.jbi.2007.09.003. Retrieved from http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1532046407001049</ref>
  
 +
=== EMR and Providers’ Productivity  ===
 +
 +
Health care providers are adopting electronic medical records, but some doctors report a disturbing side effect. Instead of becoming more efficient, some practices, especially smaller ones are becoming less. As with all new systems, there will be a temporary reduction in productivity as the healthcare staff become familiar with the new system. A study by Menachemi and Brooks (2006) estimated a 20% loss of productivity for the first month, 10% loss in the second month, and 5% loss in the third month and finally productivity returning to baseline in the subsequent months. <ref name="Brooks 2006">Menachemi, N. & Brooksm R. (2006). Reviewing the Benefits and Costs of Electronic Health Records and Associated Patient Safety Technologies.http://download.springer.com.ezproxyhost.library.tmc.edu/static/pdf/470/art%253A10.1007%252Fs10916-005-7988-x.pdf?auth66=1411967145_1fbceb4fa2c5cea1c67867e88dd78695&ext=.pdf</ref>. Several studies indicated that when physicians spent extra time entering data themselves, it cut down time spent with patients and stretched out their workday. [70]
 +
 +
In a study by Bhargava et al. which examines productivity impacts of electronic medical records (EMR) implementation in a large academic hospital in California. Bhargava et al. also investigate the dynamics through which EMRs may impact productivity. The study employ random effects model on panel data comprising 3,189 physician-month observations for productivity data collected on 87 physicians specializing in internal medicine, pediatrics and family practice. The total duration of data collection was 39 months. Bhargava et al. find that the productivity of physicians dropped immediately after EMR implementation, but began to recover in a few months and finally leveled-off. Additionally, Bhargava et al. find that productivity impacts of EMR are contingent upon physician specialty. Bhargava et al postulate that the fit provided by an EMR to the task requirements of physicians of various specialties is key to entangling the productivity dynamics. [71]
  
  
 
== References ==
 
== References ==
 
<references/>
 
<references/>

Revision as of 07:28, 21 February 2015

Physician Recruitment

68% of physicians surveyed by the National Center for Health Statistics report that the implementation and use of electronic health records is seen as an asset when recruiting physicians to their practice.[1]

Physician Satisfaction

An association has been shown to exist between EMR use and physician satisfaction with their current practice[76], as well as with their career satisfaction [77].


Standardization of Practice

Although publication of evidence-based medicine abounds, it has been noted that physicians do not practice according to proven guidelines.[2] The reasons are numerous. One of them is that busy physicians do not have the time to read publications that have increased exponentially. [3] Another is the innate human limitation in the capacity to integrate information during decision-making.[2] This has led to a decline in patient care standards.[3] CDDS can increase compliance with evidence-based practice by presenting the needed information to the clinician at the point of care.[2] And while there is resistance to its use from physicians who view CDSS as an out of the box practice that is not tailored to their clinical workflow, it has been noted that incorporating factors such as patient-specific information, consideration of comorbid conditions, and organized and explicit presentation, might result in increased CDSS utilization. [4]

EMR and Providers’ Productivity

Health care providers are adopting electronic medical records, but some doctors report a disturbing side effect. Instead of becoming more efficient, some practices, especially smaller ones are becoming less. As with all new systems, there will be a temporary reduction in productivity as the healthcare staff become familiar with the new system. A study by Menachemi and Brooks (2006) estimated a 20% loss of productivity for the first month, 10% loss in the second month, and 5% loss in the third month and finally productivity returning to baseline in the subsequent months. [5]. Several studies indicated that when physicians spent extra time entering data themselves, it cut down time spent with patients and stretched out their workday. [70]

In a study by Bhargava et al. which examines productivity impacts of electronic medical records (EMR) implementation in a large academic hospital in California. Bhargava et al. also investigate the dynamics through which EMRs may impact productivity. The study employ random effects model on panel data comprising 3,189 physician-month observations for productivity data collected on 87 physicians specializing in internal medicine, pediatrics and family practice. The total duration of data collection was 39 months. Bhargava et al. find that the productivity of physicians dropped immediately after EMR implementation, but began to recover in a few months and finally leveled-off. Additionally, Bhargava et al. find that productivity impacts of EMR are contingent upon physician specialty. Bhargava et al postulate that the fit provided by an EMR to the task requirements of physicians of various specialties is key to entangling the productivity dynamics. [71]


References

  1. Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named Jamoom
  2. 2.0 2.1 2.2 Morris, A. H. (2000). Developing and implementing computerized protocols for standardization of clinical decisions. Retrieved from http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1532046407001049
  3. 3.0 3.1 Sackett, D. L., & Rosenberg, W. M. (1995). The need for evidence-based medicine. J R Soc Med, 88(11), 620-624. Retrieved from http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1295384/?tool=pmcentrez
  4. Sittig, D. F., Wright, A., Osheroff, J. A., Middleton, B., Teich, J. M., Ash, J. S., . . . Bates, D. W. (2008). Grand challenges in clinical decision support. J Biomed Inform, 41(2), 387-392. doi: 10.1016/j.jbi.2007.09.003. Retrieved from http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1532046407001049
  5. Menachemi, N. & Brooksm R. (2006). Reviewing the Benefits and Costs of Electronic Health Records and Associated Patient Safety Technologies.http://download.springer.com.ezproxyhost.library.tmc.edu/static/pdf/470/art%253A10.1007%252Fs10916-005-7988-x.pdf?auth66=1411967145_1fbceb4fa2c5cea1c67867e88dd78695&ext=.pdf