Table 4. Office Size and Ratings of Components of Overall Quality and Safety
Average % Positive Rating Overall Quality Item
Patient CenteredEffective, Based on Scientific KnowledgeTimelyEfficient (Cost-Effective)EquitableOverall Safety Rating of Office Systems
Office Size*
    Small (3–15 staff)78 (73–82)78 (74–83)64 (60–68)69 (64–74)89 (86–92)71 (68–75)
    Medium (16–40 staff)69 (64–73)72 (67–76)46 (42–50)54 (50–59)85 (82–89)63 (60–67)
    Large (41–70 staff)64 (58–70)68 (63–74)42 (36–48)46 (40–52)81 (77–85)59 (53–64)
    Very Large (≥71 staff)55 (46–64)63 (55–70)38 (29–47)42 (34–50)76 (71–82)54 (47–62)
Global P (overall effect of size)<.0001<.0001<.0001<.0001<.0001<.0001
Pair-wise comparisons†
    Small vs medium.0013.0087<.0001<.0001.1128.0065
    Small vs large.0002.0028<.0001<.0001.0005.0007
    Small vs very large<.0001.0006<.0001<.0001.0001.0006
    Medium vs large.4724.6551.6833.0625.0837.4838
    Medium vs very large.0166.1161.2864.0182.0097.1627
    Large vs very large.2652.5544.8267.7584.4874.7941

  • ↵* Data provided as means adjusted for role and stage of HIT implementation (low, partial, high, or full) (95% confidence intervals).

  • ↵† Data provided as Tukey-adjusted P values.