Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Variation in Electronic Health Record Adoption and Readiness for Meaningful Use: 2008–2011

  • Health Policy
  • Published:
Journal of General Internal Medicine Aims and scope Submit manuscript

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND

Federal initiatives are underway that provide physicians with financial incentives for meaningful use (MU) of electronic health records (EHRs) and assistance to purchase and implement EHRs.

OBJECTIVE

We sought to examine readiness and interest in MU among primary care physicians and specialists, and identify factors that may affect their readiness to obtain MU incentives.

DESIGN/PARTICIPANTS

We analyzed 4 years of data (2008–2011) from the National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey (NAMCS) Electronic Medical Record (EMR) Supplement, an annual cross-sectional nationally representative survey of non-federally employed office-based physicians.

MAIN MEASURES

Survey-weighted EHR adoption rates, potential to meet selected MU criteria, and self-reported intention to apply for MU incentives. We also examined the association between physician and practice characteristics and readiness for MU.

KEY RESULTS

The overall sample consisted of 10,889 respondents, with weighted response rates of 62 % (2008); 74 % (2009); 66 % (2010); and 61 % (2011). Primary care physicians’ adoption of EHRs with the potential to meet MU nearly doubled from 2009 to 2011 (18 % to 38 %, p < 0.01), and was significantly higher than specialists (19 %) in 2011 (p < 0.01). In 2011, half of physicians (52 %) expressed their intention to apply for MU incentives; this did not vary by specialty. Multivariate analyses report that EHR adoption was significantly higher in both 2010 and 2011 compared to 2009, and primary care physicians and physicians working in larger or multi-specialty practices or for HMOs were more likely to adopt EHRs with the potential to meet MU.

CONCLUSIONS

Physician EHR adoption rates increased in advance of MU incentive payments. Although interest in MU incentives did not vary by specialty, primary care physicians had significantly higher rates of adopting EHRs with the potential to meet MU. Addressing barriers to EHR adoption, which may vary by specialty, will be important to enhancing coordination of care.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Figure 1.
Figure 2.
Figure 3.

Similar content being viewed by others

REFERENCES

  1. Buntin MB, Burke MF, Hoaglin MC, Blumenthal D. The benefits of health information technology: a review of the recent literature shows predominantly positive results. Health Aff (Millwood). 2011;30(3):464–71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Buntin MB, Jain SH, Blumenthal D. Health information technology: laying the infrastructure for national health reform. Health Aff (Millwood). 2010;29(6):1214–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Hsiao CJ, Hing E, Socey TC, Cai B. Electronic Health Record Systems and Intent to Apply for Meaningful Use Incentives Among Office-Based Physician Practices: United States, 2001–2011. NCHS Data Brief, No79. Hyattsville: National Center for Health Statistics; 2011.

    Google Scholar 

  4. DesRoches CM, Campbell EG, Rao SR, et al. Electronic health records in ambulatory care—a national survey of physicians. N Engl J Med. 2008;359(1):50–60.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Simon SR, Kaushal R, Cleary PD, et al. Physicians and electronic health records: a statewide survey. Arch Intern Med. 2007;167(5):507–12.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Bramble JD, Galt KA, Siracuse MV, Abbott AA, Drincic A, Paschal KA, et al. The relationship between physician practice characteristics and physician adoption of electronic health records. Health Care Manag Rev. 2010;35(1):55–64.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Rao SR, Desroches CM, Donelan K, Campbell EG, Miralles PD, Jha AK. Electronic health records in small physician practices: availability, use, and perceived benefits. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2011;18(3):271–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Menachemi N, Powers TL, Brooks RG. Physician and practice characteristics associated with longitudinal increases in electronic health records adoption. J Healthc Manag. 2011;56(3):183–97.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Blumenthal D. Launching HITECH. N Engl J Med. 2010;362(5):382–5.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Blumenthal D, Tavenner M. The “meaningful use” regulation for electronic health records. N Engl J Med. 2010;363(6):501–4.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Maxson E, Jain S, Kendall M, Mostashari F, Blumenthal D. The regional extension center program: helping physicians meaningfully use health information technology. Ann Intern Med. 2010;153(10):666–70.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Hsiao CJ, Beatty PC, Hing E, Woodwell DA, Rechtsteiner EA, Sisk JE. Electronic medical record/electronic health record use by office-based physicians: United States, 2008 and preliminary 2009. National Center for Health Statistics Health E-stat.

  13. Hsiao CJ, Burt CW, Rechsteiner E, Hing E, Woodwell DA, Sisk JE. Electronic medical record use by office-based physicians: United States, 2008; 2008. National Center for Health Statistics Health E-stat.

  14. Marcotte L, Seidman J, Trudel K, et al. Achieving meaningful use of health information technology: a guide for physicians to the EHR incentive programs. Arch Intern Med. 2012;172(9):731–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. National Center for Health Statistics. National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey Microdatafile; 2008.

  16. Bitton A, Martin C, Landon BE. A nationwide survey of patient centered medical home demonstration projects. J Gen Intern Med. 2010;25(6):584–92.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Kern LM, Barron Y, Abramson EL, Patel V, Kaushal R. HEAL NY: promoting interoperable health information technology in New York State. Health Aff (Millwood). 2009;28(2):493–504.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Decker SL, Jamoom EW, Sisk JE. Physicians in nonprimary care and small practices and those age 55 and older lag in adopting electronic health record systems. Health Aff (Millwood). 2012;31(5):1108–14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Corey C Grossman JM. Clinical Information Technology Adoption Varies Across Physician Specialties. Center for Health System Change; 2007; 34.

  20. Rittenhouse DR, Shortell SM. The patient-centered medical home: will it stand the test of health reform? JAMA. 2009;301(19):2038–40.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Bruen BK, Ku L, Burke MF, Buntin MB. More than four in five office-based physicians could qualify for federal electronic health record incentives. Health Aff (Millwood). 2011;30(3):472–80.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. US. Department of Health and Human Services. Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology. Regional Extension Centers. ONC’s Regional Extension Centers Sign Up 100,000 Primary Care Providers. Available at:.(http://www.healthit.gov/buzz-blog/regional-extension-centers/rec-primary-care-providers/). Accessed November 15, 2012.

  23. Abramson EL, Kaushal R. Computerized provider order entry and patient safety. Pediatr Clin N Am. 2012;59(6):1247–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Wolfstadt JI, Gurwitz JH, Field TS, Lee M, Kalkar S, Wu W, Rochon PA. The effect of computerized physician order entry with clinical decision support on the rates of adverse drug events: a systematic review. J Gen Intern Med. 2008;23(4):451–8. Review.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Kaushal R, Shojania KG, Bates DW. Effects of computerized physician order entry and clinical decision support systems on medication safety: a systematic review. Arch Intern Med. 2003;163(12):1409–16. Review.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Kern LM, Barrón Y, Dhopeshwarkar RV, Edwards A, Kaushal R; with the HITEC Investigators. Electronic health records and ambulatory quality of care. J Gen Intern Med. 2012; doi:10.1007/s11606-012-2237-8.

  27. Cebul RD, Love TE, Jain AK, Hebert CJ. Electronic health records and quality of diabetes care. N Engl J Med. 2011;365(9):825–33.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Abramson EL, Barron Y, Quaresimo J, Kaushal R. Electronic prescribing within an electronic health record reduces ambulatory prescribing errors. Jt Comm J Qual Patient Saf. 2011;37(10):470–8.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Jain A, McCarthy K, Xu M, Stoller JK. Impact of a clinical decision support system in an electronic health record to enhance detection of alpha-antitrypsin deficiency. Chest. 2011;140(1):198–204.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Bell LM, Grundmeier R, Localio R, et al. Electronic health record-based decision support to improve asthma care: a cluster-randomized trial. Pediatrics. 2010;125(4):e770–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Chen C, Garrido T, Chock D, Okawa G, Liang L. The Kaiser Permanente Electronic Health Record: transforming and streamlining modalities of care. Health Aff (Millwood). 2009;28(2):323–33.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Cai B, Shimizu I. Electronic Medical Record Systems Nonresponse Bias Analysis for 2011 NAMCS Mail Survey. Joint Statistical Meeting; 2012.

  33. Jamoom E, Beatty P, Bercovitz A, Woodwell D, Palso K, Rechtsteiner E. Physician Adoption of Electronic Health Record Systems: United States, 2011. NCHS Data Brief, No 98. Hyattsville: National Center for Health Statistics; 2012.

    Google Scholar 

  34. Ventres WB, Frankel RM. Patient-centered care and electronic health records: it’s still about the relationship. Fam Med. 2010;42(5):364–6.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

Funders

The Office of the National Coordinator (ONC) for Health Information Technology at the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services funded the survey and supported the salaries of ONC and National Center for Health Statistics staff to conduct this study.

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that they do not have conflict of interest.

Prior Presentations

This paper was presented as an oral presentation at the AcademyHealth Annual Research Meeting, in Seattle in June, 2011.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology (ONC), U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Washington, DC, USA

    Vaishali Patel MPH, PhD & Michael F. Furukawa PhD

  2. National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS), U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Washington, DC, USA

    Eric Jamoom PhD, MS, MPH & Chun-Ju Hsiao PhD, MHS

  3. Congressional Budget Office, Washington, DC, USA

    Melinda Buntin PhD

Authors
  1. Vaishali Patel MPH, PhD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Eric Jamoom PhD, MS, MPH
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Chun-Ju Hsiao PhD, MHS
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Michael F. Furukawa PhD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Melinda Buntin PhD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Vaishali Patel MPH, PhD.

Additional information

The views expressed should not be interpreted as those of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the Congressional Budget Office or the Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Appendix Table 1

MU Criteria to National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey EMR Supplement MU Final Rule (PDF 24 kb)

Appendix Table 2

Physician Characteristics: Primary Care Specialty Versus Other Specialties, 2008–2011 (PDF 26 kb)

Appendix Table 3

Multivariate Analyses: Factors Significantly Associated with Physician Adoption of “Any” and “Basic” EHRs (p <  0.05) (PDF 31 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Patel, V., Jamoom, E., Hsiao, CJ. et al. Variation in Electronic Health Record Adoption and Readiness for Meaningful Use: 2008–2011. J GEN INTERN MED 28, 957–964 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11606-012-2324-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11606-012-2324-x

KEY WORDS

Search

Navigation