Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Does it Get Easier to Use an EHR? Report from an Urban Regional Extension Center

  • Original Research
  • Published:
Journal of General Internal Medicine Aims and scope Submit manuscript

A Capsule Commentary to this article was published on 15 July 2014

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND

Little is known about whether more experience with an electronic health record (EHR) makes it easier for providers to meaningfully use EHRs.

OBJECTIVE

To assess whether the length of time that small practice providers have been using the EHR is associated with greater ease in performing meaningful use-related tasks and fewer EHR-related concerns.

DESIGN/PARTICIPANTS

We administered a web-based survey to 400 small practice providers in medically underserved communities in New York City participating in an EHR implementation and technical assistance project. We used logistic regression to estimate the association between the length of time a provider had been using the EHR (i.e., “live”) and the ease of performing meaningful use-related tasks and EHR-related concerns, controlling for provider and practice characteristics.

KEY RESULTS

Compared to providers who had been live 6 to 12 months, providers who had been live 2 years or longer had 2.02 times greater odds of reporting it was easy to e-prescribe new prescriptions (p < 0.05), 2.12 times greater odds of reporting it was easy to e-prescribe renewal prescriptions (p < 0.05), 2.02 times greater odds of reporting that quality measures were easy to report (p < 0.05), 2.64 times greater odds of reporting it was easy to incorporate lab results as structured data (p < 0.001), and 2.00 times greater odds of reporting it was easy to generate patient lists by condition (p < 0.05). Providers who had been live 2 years or longer had 0.40 times lower odds of reporting financial costs were a concern (p < 0.001), 0.46 times lower odds of reporting that productivity loss was a concern (p < 0.05), 0.54 times lower odds of reporting that EHR unreliability was a concern (p < 0.05), and 0.50 times lower odds of reporting that privacy/security was a concern (p < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Providers can successfully adjust to the EHR and over time are better able to meaningfully use the EHR.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

REFERENCES

  1. Hing E, Burt CW. Office-Based Medical Practices: methods and Estimates From the National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey. Adv Data, No 383. Hyattsville, MD: National Center for Health Statistics; 2007.

    Google Scholar 

  2. 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, No 79. Hyattsville, MD: National Center for Health Statistics; 2011:2011.

    Google Scholar 

  3. King J, Patel V, Furukawa MF. Physician Adoption of Electronic Health Record Technology to Meet Meaningful use Objectives: 2009–2012. ONC Data Brief, No. 7. Washington, DC: Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology; 2012.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Patel V, Jamoom E, Hsiao CJ, Furukawa MF, Buntin M. Variation in electronic health record adoption and readiness for meaningful use: 2008–2011. J Gen Intern Med. 2013;28:957–64.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  5. Simon SR, Kaushal R, Cleary PD, et al. Correlates of electronic health record adoption in office practices: a statewide survey. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2007;14:110–7.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  6. 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;18:271–5.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  7. 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;31:1108–14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. 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; 2011:2012.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Mostashari F, Tripathi M, Kendall M. A tale of two large community electronic health record extension projects. Health Aff (Millwood). 2009;28:345–56.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. 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;153:666–70.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Blumenthal D, Tavenner M. The “Meaningful Use” regulation for electronic health records. N Engl J Med. 2010;363:501–4.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Lee J, Cain C, Young S, Chockley N, Burstin H. The adoption gap: health information technology in small physician practices. Health Aff (Millwood). 2005;24:1364–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Landon BE, Normand ST. Performance measurement in the small office practice: challenges and potential solutions. Ann Intern Med. 2008;148:353–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Messeri P, Khan S, Millery M, et al. An information systems model of the determinants of electronic health record use. Appl Clin Inform. 2013;4:185–200.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  16. DesRoches CM, Audet AM, Painter M, Donelan K. Meeting meaningful use criteria and managing patient populations: a national survey of practicing physicians. Ann Intern Med. 2013;158:791–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Jamieson S. Likert scales: how to (ab)use them. Med Educ. 2004;38(12):1217–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. SAS Institute. SAS Software version 9.2 Cary, NC: SAS Institute Inc; 2002–2008.

  19. Hsiao CJ, Jha AK, King J, Patel V, Furukawa MF, Mostashari F. Office-based physicians are responding to incentives and assistance by adopting and using electronic health records. Health Aff (Millwood). 2013;32:1470–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Heisey-Grove D, Danehy LN, Consolazio M, Lynch K, Mostashari F. A national study of challenges to electronic health record adoption and meaningful use. Med Care. 2014;52(2):144–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Government Health IT. EHR Makers Surprised by Stage 2 Complexity. Available at: http://www.govhealthit.com/news/vendors-struggle-mu-stage-2-EHR-ONC. Accessed 18 April 2014.

  22. Friedberg MW, Chen PG, Van Busum KR, et al. Factors Affecting Physician Professional Satisfaction and Their Implications for Patient Care, Health Systems, and Health Policy. 2013; RR-439-AMA. Available at http://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RR439.html. Accessed 18 April 2014.

  23. Hsiao CJ, Decker SL, Hing E, Sisk JE. Most physicians were eligible for federal incentives in 2011, but few had EHR systems that met meaningful-use criteria. Health Aff (Millwood). 2012;31:1100–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Gold M, Hossain M, Charles DR, Furukawa MF. Evolving vendor market for HITECH-certified ambulatory EHR products. Am J Manage Care. 2013;19(11 Spec No. 10):SP353–61.

  25. Ryan AM, Bishop TF, Shih S, Casalino LP. Small physician practices in New York needed sustained help to realize gains in quality from use of electronic health records. Health Aff (Millwood). 2012;32:53–62.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Hysong SJ, Best RG, Pugh JA. Clinical practice guideline implementation strategy patterns in Veterans Affairs primary care clinics. Health Serv Res. 2007;42:84–103.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  27. 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;28:323–33.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Gao J, Moran E, Almenoff PL, Render ML, Campbell J, Jha AK. Variations in efficiency and the relationship to quality of care in the Veterans Health System. Health Aff (Millwood). 2011;30:655–63.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Lee TH, Bothe A, Steele GD. How Geisinger structures its physicians’ compensation to support improvements in quality, efficiency, and volume. Health Aff. 2012;31:2068–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Fleming NS, Culler SD, McCorkle R, Becker ER, Ballard DJ. The financial and nonfinancial costs of implementing electronic health records in primary care practices. Health Aff (Millwood). 2011;30:481–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Office of the National Coordinator. Meaningful Use Stage 2. Available at: http://www.healthit.gov/policy-researchers-implementers/meaningful-use-stage-2. Accessed 18 April 2014.

  32. El-Kareh R, Gandhi TK, Poon EG, et al. Trends in primary care clinician perceptions of a new electronic health record. J Gen Intern Med. 2009;24:464–8.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  33. Kanzaria HK, Brook RH. The silent physician. J Gen Intern Med. 2013;28:1389–91.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank those who served on the Survey Development Group at PCIP, including Sheila Anane and Rachel Helfont and Dr. Larry Casalino, Dr. Tara Bishop, and Dr. Amanda Parsons for guidance in designing the survey. Thanks to Samantha Catlett and Maryam Khan for assistance with data collection and Brent Stackhouse for help obtaining survey honoraria. Thanks to the many people who tested the survey, including members of our Provider Advisory Board and PCIP staff. We would like to thank Dr. Andrew Ryan for helpful comments on the paper.

Conflict of Interest

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

Funding

The New York City Tax Levy and the Office of the National Coordinator (ONC) for Health Information Technology funded the survey and supported the salaries of staff to conduct this study.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene, Primary Care Information Project (PCIP), 42-09 28th Street– CN#52 Gotham Center, Long Island City, NY, 11101, USA

    Mandy Smith Ryan Ph.D., Sarah C. Shih MPH, Chloe H. Winther BA & Jason J. Wang Ph.D.

Authors
  1. Mandy Smith Ryan Ph.D.
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Sarah C. Shih MPH
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Chloe H. Winther BA
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Jason J. Wang Ph.D.
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mandy Smith Ryan Ph.D..

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

ESM 1

(DOC 342 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Ryan, M.S., Shih, S.C., Winther, C.H. et al. Does it Get Easier to Use an EHR? Report from an Urban Regional Extension Center. J GEN INTERN MED 29, 1341–1348 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11606-014-2891-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11606-014-2891-0

KEY WORDS

Search

Navigation