PDF herunterladen
Appl Clin Inform 2013; 04(01): 12-24
DOI: 10.4338/ACI-2012-09-RA-0033
Research Article
Schattauer GmbH

Predictors of success for electronic health record implementation in small physician practices

J.S. Ancker
1   Weill Cornell Medical College, Center for Healthcare Informatics and Policy, Departments of Pediatrics and of Public Health, New York, NY 10034
2   Health Information Technology Evaluation Collaborative (HITEC)
,
M.P. Singh
3   New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene, New York, NY
,
R. Thomas
1   Weill Cornell Medical College, Center for Healthcare Informatics and Policy, Departments of Pediatrics and of Public Health, New York, NY 10034
2   Health Information Technology Evaluation Collaborative (HITEC)
,
A. Edwards
1   Weill Cornell Medical College, Center for Healthcare Informatics and Policy, Departments of Pediatrics and of Public Health, New York, NY 10034
2   Health Information Technology Evaluation Collaborative (HITEC)
,
A. Snyder
3   New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene, New York, NY
,
A. Kashyap
4   eClinicalWorks, New York, NY
,
R. Kaushal
1   Weill Cornell Medical College, Center for Healthcare Informatics and Policy, Departments of Pediatrics and of Public Health, New York, NY 10034
2   Health Information Technology Evaluation Collaborative (HITEC)
› Institutsangaben
Weitere Informationen

Publikationsverlauf

received: 17. September 2012

accepted: 19. Januar 2012

Publikationsdatum:
19. Dezember 2017 (online)

   Lizenzen und Reprints

Summary

Background: The federal government is promoting adoption of electronic health records (EHRs) through financial incentives for EHR use and implementation support provided by regional extension centers. Small practices have been slow to adopt EHRs.

Objectives: Our objective was to measure time to EHR implementation and identify factors associated with successful implementation in small practices receiving financial incentives and implementation support. This study is unique in exploiting quantitative implementation time data collected prospectively as part of routine project management.

Methods: This mixed-methods study includes interviews of key informants and a cohort study of 544 practices that had worked with the Primary Care Information Project (PCIP), a publicly funded organization that since 2007 has subsidized EHRs and provided implementation support similar to that supplied by the new regional extension centers. Data from a project management database were used for a cohort study to assess time to implementation and predictors of implementation success.

Results: Four hundred and thirty practices (79%) implemented EHRs within the analysis period, with a median project time of 24.7 weeks (95% CI: 23.3 – 26.4). Factors associated with implementation success were: fewer providers, practice sites, and patients; fewer Medicaid and uninsured patients; having previous experience with scheduling software; enrolling in 2010 rather than earlier; and selecting an integrated EHR plus practice management product rather than two products. Interviews identified positive attitude toward EHRs, resources, and centralized leadership as additional practice-level predictors of success.

Conclusions: A local initiative similar to current federal programs successfully implemented EHRs in primary care practices by offsetting software costs and providing implementation assistance. Nevertheless, implementation success was affected by practice size and other characteristics, suggesting that the federal programs can reduce barriers to EHR implementation but may not eliminate them.

Citation: Ancker JS, Singh MP, Thomas R, Edwards A, Snyder A, Kashyap A, Kaushal R. Predictors of success for electronic health record implementation in small physician practices. Appl Clin Inf 2013; 4: 12–24

http://dx.doi.org/10.4338/ACI-2012-09-RA-0033

Keywords

Electronic health records - ambulatory care/primary care - implementation and deployment - facilitators and barriers - quantitative methods - mixed methods
 

  • References

  • 1 DesRoches CM, Campbell EG, Rao SR, Donelan K, Ferris TG, Jha A. et al. Electronic health records in ambulatory care: A national survey of physicians. New England Journal of Medicine 2008; 359 (01) 50-60.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 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 Management Review 2010; 35 (01) 55-64.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Rao SR, DesRoches C, Donelan K, Campbell E, Miralles P, Jha A. Electronic health records in small physician practices: Availability, use, and perceived benefits. JAMIA 2011; 18: 271-275.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Jha AK, DesRoches CM, Campbell EG, Donelan K, Rao SR, Ferris TG. et al. Use of electronic health records in U. S. hospitals. The New England journal of medicine 2009 Apr 16 360 (16) 1628-38. PubMed PMID: 19321858. Epub 2009/03/27.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Gans D, Kralewski J, Hammons T, Dowd B. Medical groups’ adoption of electronic health records and information systems. Health Affairs (Millwood) 2005; 24 (05) 1323-1333.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Simon SR, Kaushal R, Cleary PD, Jenter CA, Volk LA, Poon EG. et al. Correlates of electronic health record adoption in office practices: a statewide survey. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2007; 14 (01) 110-117. PubMed PMID: 17068351.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Simon SR, Kaushal R, Cleary PD, Jenter CA, Volk LA, Orav EJ. et al. Physicians and electronic health records: a statewide survey. Arch Intern Med 2007; 167 (05) 507-512. PubMed PMID: 17353500.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Maxson E, Jane S, Kendall M, Mostashari F, Blumenthal D. The regional extension center program: helping physicians meaningfully use health information technology. Annals of Internal Medicine 2010; 153: 666-670.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Blumenthal D, Tavenner M. The "meaningful use" regulation for electronic health records. New England Journal of Medicine 2010; 363: 501-504.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Medicare and Medicaid Programs.. Electronic Health Record Incentive Program, Final Rule. 75 Federal Register 144 (28 July 2010) 2010
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Scott J, Rundall T, Vogt T, Hsu J. Kaiser Permanente’s experience of implementing an electronic medical record: A qualitative study. British Medical Journal 2005; 331: 1313-1316.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 McAlaerney A, Song P, Robbins J. Moving from good to great in ambulatory electronic health record implementation. Journal of Healthcare Quality 2010; 32 (05) 41-50.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Yoon-Flannery K, Zandieh S, Kuperman GJ, Langsam D, Hyman D, Kaushal R. A qualitative analysis of an electronic health record (EHR) implementation in an academic ambulatory setting. Informatics in Primary Care 2008; 16: 277-284.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Fullerton C, Aponte P, Hopkins R, Bragg D, Ballard DJ. Lessons learned from pilot site implementation of an ambulatory electronic health record. Proceedings of the Baylor University Medical Center 2006; 19: 303-310.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Baron RJ, Fabens EL, Schiffman M, Wolf E. Electronic health records: Just around the corner?. Or over the Cliff? Annals of Internal Medicine 2005; 143 (03) 222-226.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Miller RH, Sim I, Newman J. Electronic medical records: Lessons from small physician practices. Oakland, CA: California HealthCare Foundation,; 2003
    Google Scholar
  • 17 Ludwick D, Manca D, Doucette J. Primary care physicians’ experiences with electronic medical records: Implementation experience in community, urban, hospital, and academic family medicine. Canadian Family Physician 2010; 56: 40-47.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Lorenzi NM, Kouroubali A, Detmer DE, Bloomrosen M. How to successfully select and implement electronic health records (EHR) in small ambulatory practice settings. BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making. 2010 9:(15)
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Torda P, Han ES, Scholle SH. Easing the adoption and use of electronic health records in small practices. Health Affairs (Millwood) 2010; 29 (04) 668-675.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Fleurant M, Kell R, Jenter C, Volk LA, Zhang F, Bates DW. et al. Factors associated with difficult electronic health record implementation in office practice. Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association. 2012
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Mostashari F, Tripathi M, Kendall M. A tale of two large community electronic health record extension projects. Health Aff (Millwood) 2009; 28 (02) 345-356. PubMed PMID: 19275989.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Safran C, Bloomrosen M, Hammond WE, Labkoff S, Markel-Fox S, Tang PC. et al. Toward a national framework for the secondary use of health data: An American Medical Informatics Association white paper. JAMIA 2007; 14 (01) 1-9.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Strauss A, Corbin J. Basics of Qualitative Research: Techniques and Procedures for Developing Grounded Theory. 2nd ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage; 1998
    Google Scholar
  • 24 Lincoln YS, Guba EG. Naturalistic Inquiry. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.; 1985
    Google Scholar
  • 25 Crabtree BF, Miller WL. Doing Qualitative Research. 2nd ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications; 1999
    Google Scholar
  • 26 Ancker JS, Shih S, Singh MP, Snyder A, Edwards A, Kaushal R. et al. Root causes underlying challenges to secondary use of data. Proceedings / AMIA Annual Fall Symposium 2011; 2011: 57-62.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Akaike H. A new look at the statistical model identification. IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control 1974; 19 (06) 716-723.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Dennehy P, White MP, Hamilton A, Pohl JM, Tanner C, Onifade TJ. et al. A partnership model for implementing electronic health records in resource-limited primary care settings: experiences from two nurse-managed health centers. Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association 2011; 18 (06) 820-826.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Goldberg DG, Kuzel AJ, Feng LB, DeShazo JP, Love LE. EHRs in primary care practices: benefits, challenges, and successful strategies. American Journal of Managed Care 2012; 18 (02) e48-e54.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 30 Rogers EM. Diffusion of innovations. New York Free Press; 1962/2003.
    Google Scholar
  • 31 Lorenzi NM, Riley RT. Managing change: an overview. Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association 2000; 7: 116-124.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 32 Prokosch H-U, Ganslandt T. Reusing the electronic medical record for clinical research. Methods of Information in Medicine 2009; 48: 38-44.
    Artikel in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar