Identifying and Addressing Barriers to Implementing Core Electronic Health Record Use Metrics for Ambulatory Care: Virtual Consensus Conference Proceedings

Deborah R. Levy; Amanda J. Moy; Nate Apathy; Julia Adler-Milstein; Lisa Rotenstein; Bidisha Nath; S. Trent Rosenbloom; Thomas Kannampallil; Rebecca G. Mishuris; Aram Alexanian; Amber Sieja; Michelle R. Hribar; Jigar S. Patel; Christine A. Sinsky; Edward R. Melnick

doi:10.1055/a-2187-3243

Applied Clinical Informatics, Inhaltsverzeichnis

CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 · Appl Clin Inform 2023; 14(05): 944-950
DOI: 10.1055/a-2187-3243

State of the Art/Best Practice Paper

Identifying and Addressing Barriers to Implementing Core Electronic Health Record Use Metrics for Ambulatory Care: Virtual Consensus Conference Proceedings

Authors

Deborah R. Levy

¹Department of Veterans Affairs, VA Connecticut Healthcare System, West Haven, Connecticut, United States

²Section of Biomedical Informatics and Data Sciences, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut, United States
Amanda J. Moy

³Department of Biomedical Informatics, Columbia University, New York, New York, United States
Nate Apathy

⁴National Center for Human Factors in Healthcare, MedStar Health Research Institute, Washington, District of Columbia, United States

⁵Center for Biomedical Informatics, Regenstrief Institute, Indianapolis, Iowa, United States
Julia Adler-Milstein

⁶Department of Medicine, Center for Clinical Informatics and Improvement Research, University of California, San Francisco, California, United States
Lisa Rotenstein

⁷Division of General Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, United States

⁸Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, United States
Bidisha Nath

⁹Department of Emergency Medicine, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut, United States
S. Trent Rosenbloom

¹⁰Department of Biomedical Informatics, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, Tennessee, United States
Thomas Kannampallil

¹¹Department of Anesthesiology, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri, United States

¹²Institute for Informatics, Data Science, and Biostatistics (I2DB), Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri, United States
Rebecca G. Mishuris

⁷Division of General Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, United States

⁸Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, United States

¹³Digital, Mass General Brigham, Boston, Massachusetts, United States
Aram Alexanian

¹⁴Novant Health, Charlotte, North Carolina, United States
Amber Sieja

¹⁵Department of General Internal Medicine, University of Colorado School of Medicine, Aurora, Colorado, United States
Michelle R. Hribar

¹⁶Department of Medical Informatics and Clinical Epidemiology, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, Oregon, United States
Jigar S. Patel

¹⁷Oracle Corporation, Kansas City, Missouri, United States
Christine A. Sinsky

¹⁸American Medical Association, Chicago, Illinois, United States
Edward R. Melnick

²Section of Biomedical Informatics and Data Sciences, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut, United States

⁹Department of Emergency Medicine, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut, United States

Abstract

Precise, reliable, valid metrics that are cost-effective and require reasonable implementation time and effort are needed to drive electronic health record (EHR) improvements and decrease EHR burden. Differences exist between research and vendor definitions of metrics.

Process We convened three stakeholder groups (health system informatics leaders, EHR vendor representatives, and researchers) in a virtual workshop series to achieve consensus on barriers, solutions, and next steps to implementing the core EHR use metrics in ambulatory care.

Conclusion Actionable solutions identified to address core categories of EHR metric implementation challenges include: (1) maintaining broad stakeholder engagement, (2) reaching agreement on standardized measure definitions across vendors, (3) integrating clinician perspectives, and (4) addressing cognitive and EHR burden. Building upon the momentum of this workshop's outputs offers promise for overcoming barriers to implementing EHR use metrics.

Keywords

audit logs - metrics - electronic health records and systems - data validation and verification - ambulatory care/primary care - facilitators and barriers - use, administration, and maintenance

Volltext

Referenzen

References
1 Sinsky CA, Rule A, Cohen G. et al. Metrics for assessing physician activity using electronic health record log data. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2020; 27 (04) 639-643
2 Rule A, Melnick ER, Apathy NC. Using event logs to observe interactions with electronic health records: an updated scoping review shows increasing use of vendor-derived measures. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2022; 30 (01) 144-154
3 Levy DR, Sloss EASA, Chartash D. et al. Reflections on the Documentation Burden Reduction AMIA Plenary Session through the Lens of 25 × 5. Appl Clin Inform 2023; 14 (01) 11-15
4 Melnick ER, Ong SY, Fong A. et al. Characterizing physician EHR use with vendor derived data: a feasibility study and cross-sectional analysis. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2021; 28 (07) 1383-1392
5 Melnick ER, Sinsky CA, Krumholz HM. Implementing measurement science for electronic health record use. JAMA 2021; 325 (21) 2149-2150
6 Kannampallil T, Adler-Milstein J. Using electronic health record audit log data for research: insights from early efforts. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2022; 30 (01) 167-171
7 Tran B, Lenhart A, Ross R, Dorr DA. Burnout and EHR use among academic primary care physicians with varied clinical workloads. AMIA Jt Summits Transl Sci Proc 2019; 2019: 136-144
8 Arndt BG, Micek MA, Rule A, Shafer CM, Baltus JJ, Sinsky CA. Refining vendor-defined measures to accurately quantify EHR workload outside time scheduled with patients. Ann Fam Med 2023; 21 (03) 264-268
9 Melnick ER, Nielson JA, Finnell JT. et al. Delphi consensus on the feasibility of translating the ACEP clinical policies into computerized clinical decision support. Ann Emerg Med 2010; 56 (04) 317-320
10 Nasa P, Jain R, Juneja D. Delphi methodology in healthcare research: how to decide its appropriateness. World J Methodol 2021; 11 (04) 116-129
11 Rossetti SC, Rosenbloom S, Levy DR. et al. 25 × 5 symposium drives ongoing efforts to reduce documentation burden on U.S. clinicians: final summary report 2021 . Accessed December 5, 2021 at: https://www.dbmi.columbia.edu/wp-content/uploads/2021/12/25×5-Summary-Report.pdf or https://brand.amia.org/m/dbde97860f393e1/original/25×5-Summary-Report.pdf
12 Hobensack M, Levy DR, Cato K. et al. 25 × 5 Symposium to reduce documentation burden: report-out and call for action. Appl Clin Inform 2022; 13 (02) 439-446
13 Baxter SL, Apathy NC, Cross DA, Sinsky C, Hribar MR. Measures of electronic health record use in outpatient settings across vendors. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2021; 28 (05) 955-959
14 Overhage JM, McCallie Jr D. Physician time spent using the electronic health record during outpatient encounters: a descriptive study. Ann Intern Med 2020; 172 (03) 169-174
15 Holmgren AJ, Downing NL, Bates DW. et al. Assessment of electronic health record use between US and non-US health systems. JAMA Intern Med 2021; 181 (02) 251-259
16 Moy AJ, Aaron L, Cato KD. et al. Characterizing multitasking and workflow fragmentation in electronic health records among emergency department clinicians: using time-motion data to understand documentation burden. Appl Clin Inform 2021; 12 (05) 1002-1013
17 Chen Y, Adler-Milstein J, Sinsky CA. Measuring and maximizing undivided attention in the context of electronic health records. Appl Clin Inform 2022; 13 (04) 774-777
18 Senathirajah Y, Kaufman DR, Cato KD, Borycki EM, Fawcett JA, Kushniruk AW. Characterizing and visualizing display and task fragmentation in the electronic health record: mixed methods design. JMIR Human Factors 2020; 7 (04) e18484