Electronic Health Record Adoption and Nurse Reports of Usability and Quality of Care: The Role of Work EnvironmentFunding This project was supported by grant number R21HS023805 (PI: Kutney-Lee) from the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, and grant number R01NR014855 (PI: Aiken) from the National Institute of Nursing Research, National Institutes of Health. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality or the National Institutes of Health.
06 November 2018
31 December 2018
20 February 2019 (online)
Background Despite evidence suggesting higher quality and safer care in hospitals with comprehensive electronic health record (EHR) systems, factors related to advanced system usability remain largely unknown, particularly among nurses. Little empirical research has examined sociotechnical factors, such as the work environment, that may shape the relationship between advanced EHR adoption and quality of care.
Objective The objective of this study was to examine the independent and joint effects of comprehensive EHR adoption and the hospital work environment on nurse reports of EHR usability and nurse-reported quality of care and safety.
Methods This study was a secondary analysis of nurse and hospital survey data. Unadjusted and adjusted logistic regression models were used to assess the relationship between EHR adoption level, work environment, and a set of EHR usability and quality/safety outcomes. The sample included 12,377 nurses working in 353 hospitals.
Results In fully adjusted models, comprehensive EHR adoption was associated with lower odds of nurses reporting poor usability outcomes, such as dissatisfaction with the system (odds ratio [OR]: 0.75; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.61–0.92). The work environment was associated with all usability outcomes with nurses in better environments being less likely to report negatively. Comprehensive EHRs (OR: 0.83; 95% CI: 0.71–0.96) and better work environments (OR: 0.47; 95% CI: 0.42–0.52) were associated with lower odds of nurses reporting fair/poor quality of care, while poor patient safety grade was associated with the work environment (OR: 0.50; 95% CI: 0.46–0.54), but not EHR adoption level.
Conclusion Our findings suggest that adoption of a comprehensive EHR is associated with more positive usability ratings and higher quality of care. We also found that—independent of EHR adoption level—the hospital work environment plays a significant role in how nurses evaluate EHR usability and whether EHRs have their intended effects on improving quality and safety of care.
Protection of Human and Animal Subjects
This study was reviewed, and received exempt status, by the University of Pennsylvania Institutional Review Board.
- 1 Adler-Milstein J, Jha AK. HITECH Act drove large gains in hospital electronic health record adoption. Health Aff (Millwood) 2017; 36 (08) 1416-1422
- 2 Henry J, Pylypchuk Y, Searchy T, Patel V. Adoption of Electronic Health Record Systems among U.S. Non-Federal Acute Care Hospitals: 2008–2015. ONC Data Brief 35. Washington, DC: Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology; 2016
- 3 Adler-Milstein J, Everson J, Lee SY. EHR adoption and hospital performance: time-related effects. Health Serv Res 2015; 50 (06) 1751-1771
- 4 Hessels A, Flynn L, Cimiotti JP, Bakken S, Gershon R. Impact of heath information technology on the quality of patient care. Online J Nurs Inform 2015; 19: 19
- 5 Walker-Czyz A. The impact of an integrated electronic health record adoption on nursing care quality. J Nurs Adm 2016; 46 (7–8): 366-372
- 6 Furukawa MF, Eldridge N, Wang Y, Metersky M. Electronic health record adoption and rates of in-hospital adverse events. J Patient Saf 2016; DOI: 10.1097/PTS.0000000000000257.
- 7 Jarvis B, Johnson T, Butler P. , et al. Assessing the impact of electronic health records as an enabler of hospital quality and patient satisfaction. Acad Med 2013; 88 (10) 1471-1477
- 8 Harrison MI, Koppel R, Bar-Lev S. Unintended consequences of information technologies in health care--an interactive sociotechnical analysis. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2007; 14 (05) 542-549
- 9 Gephart S, Carrington JM, Finley B. A systematic review of nurses' experiences with unintended consequences when using the electronic health record. Nurs Adm Q 2015; 39 (04) 345-356
- 10 Kim MO, Coiera E, Magrabi F. Problems with health information technology and their effects on care delivery and patient outcomes: a systematic review. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2017; 24 (02) 246-250
- 11 Meeks DW, Smith MW, Taylor L, Sittig DF, Scott JM, Singh H. An analysis of electronic health record-related patient safety concerns. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2014; 21 (06) 1053-1059
- 12 Howe JL, Adams KT, Hettinger AZ, Ratwani RM. Electronic health record usability issues and potential contribution to patient harm. JAMA 2018; 319 (12) 1276-1278
- 13 McBride S, Tietze M, Hanley MA, Thomas L. Statewide study to assess nurses' experiences with meaningful use-based electronic health records. Comput Inform Nurs 2017; 35 (01) 18-28
- 14 Higgins LW, Shovel JA, Bilderback AL. , et al. Hospital nurses' work activity in a technology-rich environment: a triangulated quality improvement assessment. J Nurs Care Qual 2017; 32 (03) 208-217
- 15 Schenk EC, Mayer DM, Ward-Barney E, Estill P, Goss L, Shreffler-Grant J. RN perceptions of a newly adopted electronic health record. J Nurs Adm 2016; 46 (03) 139-145
- 16 Ward MM, Vartak S, Schwichtenberg T, Wakefield DS. Nurses' perceptions of how clinical information system implementation affects workflow and patient care. Comput Inform Nurs 2011; 29 (09) 502-511
- 17 Topaz M, Ronquillo C, Peltonen LM. , et al. Nurse informaticians report low satisfaction and multi-level concerns with electronic health records: results from an international survey. AMIA Annu Symp Proc 2017; 2016: 2016-2025
- 18 Lippincott C, Foronda C, Zdanowicz M, McCabe BE, Ambrosia T. The relationship between magnet designation, electronic health record adoption, and Medicare meaningful use payments. Comput Inform Nurs 2017; 35 (08) 385-391
- 19 Carayon P. Sociotechnical systems approach to healthcare quality and patient safety. Work 2012; 41 (Suppl. 01) 3850-3854
- 20 Harrison MI, Henriksen K, Hughes RG. Improving the health care work environment: a sociotechnical systems approach. Jt Comm J Qual Patient Saf 2007; 33 (11, Suppl): 3-6
- 21 Carayon P, Bass E, Bellandi T, Gurses A, Hallbeck S, Mollo V. Socio-technical systems analysis in health care: a research agenda. IIE Trans Healthc Syst Eng 2011; 1 (01) 145-160
- 22 D'Agostino F, Zega M, Rocco G, Luzzi L, Vellone E, Alvaro R. Impact of a nursing information system in clinical practice: a longitudinal study project. Ann Ig 2013; 25 (04) 329-341
- 23 Gurses AP, Ozok AA, Pronovost PJ. Time to accelerate integration of human factors and ergonomics in patient safety. BMJ Qual Saf 2012; 21 (04) 347-351
- 24 Strudwick G, McGillis Hall L, Nagle L, Trbovich P. Understanding nurses' perceptions of electronic health record use in an acute care hospital setting. Stud Health Technol Inform 2016; 225: 795
- 25 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 (03) 464-471
- 26 Boonstra A, Versluis A, Vos JF. Implementing electronic health records in hospitals: a systematic literature review. BMC Health Serv Res 2014; 14: 370
- 27 Black AD, Car J, Pagliari C. , et al. The impact of eHealth on the quality and safety of health care: a systematic overview. PLoS Med 2011; 8 (01) e1000387
- 28 McHugh MD, Kelly LA, Smith HL, Wu ES, Vanak JM, Aiken LH. Lower mortality in magnet hospitals. Med Care 2013; 51 (05) 382-388
- 29 Aiken LH, Clarke SP, Sloane DM, Lake ET, Cheney T. Effects of hospital care environment on patient mortality and nurse outcomes. J Nurs Adm 2008; 38 (05) 223-229
- 30 Kutney-Lee A, Germack H, Hatfield L. , et al. Nurse engagement in shared governance and patient and nurse outcomes. J Nurs Adm 2016; 46 (11) 605-612
- 31 Lake ET. Development of the Practice Environment Scale of the Nursing Work Index. Res Nurs Health 2002; 25 (03) 176-188
- 32 Sloane DM, Smith HL, McHugh MD, Aiken LH. Effect of changes in hospital nursing resources on improvements in patient safety and quality of care: a panel study. Med Care 2018; 56 (12) 1001-1008
- 33 American Hospital Association. AHA Annual Survey Database. Available at: http://www.ahadata.com/aha-annual-survey-database-asdb/ . Accessed December 3, 2018
- 34 American Hospital Association. AHA Healthcare IT Database. Available at: http://www.ahadata.com/aha-healthcare-database/ . Accessed December 3, 2018
- 35 American Hospital Association. Data collection methods. Available at: http://www.ahadata.com/data-collection-methods/ . Accessed December 3, 2018
- 36 National Quality Forum. 0206: Practice Environment Scale - Nursing Work Index (PES-NWI) (composite and five subscales). 2015. Available at: http://www.qualityforum.org/QPS/020 . Accessed December 5, 2018
- 37 Swiger PA, Patrician PA, Miltner RSS, Raju D, Breckenridge-Sproat S, Loan LA. The Practice Environment Scale of the Nursing Work Index: an updated review and recommendations for use. Int J Nurs Stud 2017; 74: 76-84
- 38 Warshawsky NE, Havens DS. Global use of the Practice Environment Scale of the Nursing Work Index. Nurs Res 2011; 60 (01) 17-31
- 39 McHugh MD, Ma C. Hospital nursing and 30-day readmissions among Medicare patients with heart failure, acute myocardial infarction, and pneumonia. Med Care 2013; 51 (01) 52-59
- 40 Sockolow PS, Weiner JP, Bowles KH, Lehmann HP. A new instrument for measuring clinician satisfaction with electronic health records. Comput Inform Nurs 2011; 29 (10) 574-585
- 41 Otieno OG, Toyama H, Asonuma M, Kanai-Pak M, Naitoh K. Nurses' views on the use, quality and user satisfaction with electronic medical records: questionnaire development. J Adv Nurs 2007; 60 (02) 209-219
- 42 Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. Hospital Survey on Patient Safety Culture. Rockville, MD. Available at: http://www.ahrq.gov/sops/quality-patient-safety/patientsafetyculture/hospital/index.html . Accessed December 5, 2018
- 43 Taylor SP, Ledford R, Palmer V, Abel E. We need to talk: an observational study of the impact of electronic medical record implementation on hospital communication. BMJ Qual Saf 2014; 23 (07) 584-588
- 44 Sockolow PS, Liao C, Chittams JL, Bowles KH. Evaluating the impact of electronic health records on nurse clinical process at two community health sites. 11th International Congress on Nursing Informatics, June 23–27, 2012, Montreal, Canada. NI 2012; 2012:381
- 45 Bristol AA, Nibbelink CW, Gephart SM, Carrington JM. Nurses' use of positive deviance when encountering electronic health records-related unintended consequences. Nurs Adm Q 2018; 42 (01) E1-E11
- 46 Adler-Milstein J, Embi PJ, Middleton B, Sarkar IN, Smith J. Crossing the health IT chasm: considerations and policy recommendations to overcome current challenges and enable value-based care. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2017; 24 (05) 1036-1043
- 47 Lin SC, Jha AK, Adler-Milstein J. Electronic health records associated with lower hospital mortality after systems have time to mature. Health Aff (Millwood) 2018; 37 (07) 1128-1135
- 48 Adler-Milstein J, Holmgren AJ, Kralovec P, Worzala C, Searcy T, Patel V. Electronic health record adoption in US hospitals: the emergence of a digital “advanced use” divide. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2017; 24 (06) 1142-1148
- 49 Aiken LH, Sloane DM, Barnes H, Cimiotti JP, Jarrín OF, McHugh MD. Nurses' and patients' appraisals show patient safety in hospitals remains a concern. Health Aff (Millwood) 2018; 37 (11) 1744-1751