JABFM
HOME HELP CONTACT US SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

This Article
Right arrow Full Text Freely available
Right arrow Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow Rapid Responses: Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when Rapid Responses are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Mulvehill, S.
Right arrow Articles by Porter, A.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Mulvehill, S.
Right arrow Articles by Porter, A.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?
The Journal of the American Board of Family Practice 18:464-469 (2005)
© 2005 American Board of Family Practice

Original Research

Template-Guided Versus Undirected Written Medical Documentation: A Prospective, Randomized Trial in a Family Medicine Residency Clinic

Sharon Mulvehill, MD, Gregory Schneider, MD, Cassie Murphy Cullen, PhD, Shelley Roaten, MD, Barbara Foster, PhD and Anne Porter, BS

From the University of Texas Southwestern Family Medicine Residency Program, the University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center at Dallas

Correspondence: Corresponding author: Sharon Mulvehill, MD, Department of Family Medicine, 6303 Harry Hines Boulevard, Dallas, TX 75390-9165 (e-mail: smulve{at}parknet.pmh.org)

Purpose: To compare a template-driven medical documentation system to undirected handwritten documentation and determine whether the template (1) decreases physician evaluation time, (2) increases gross billing, and (3) increases physician satisfaction with the documentation process.

Methods: A prospective randomized trial of documentation with a template system (T-System for Primary Care, Dallas, TX) versus undirected handwritten documentation was conducted in 2 separate teams of a single family medicine residency program. After training, one team used the template system and the other team used undirected written documentation. Clinic visit duration was recorded. Medical records were evaluated by a blinded professional coder to assign an evaluation/management code. Clinic visit duration and coding level differences were evaluated using an independent t test. At the conclusion of the study, residents completed a questionnaire to determine physician satisfaction with the documentation tool. Survey responses were on a –2 to + 2 Likert scale. Means and standard deviations are reported.

Results: A total of 1339 patients were included in the analysis of patient visits. There was no significant difference in clinic time between the template system and the written documentation visits. The mean visit time was 1.75 hours for both teams. For the analysis of gross billing, 1237 charts were included. The mean billing amount for written documentation was $150 and for the template system it was $163—a statistically significant difference. The physicians’ surveys favored continuing to use the template documentation method.

Conclusions: The template medical documentation system compared with undirected written documentation produced a significantly higher bill for the visit, yielding no differences in evaluation time, and was overall positively received by the residents and faculty.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?




HOME HELP CONTACT US SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 2005 by the American Board of Family Medicine.