Variable Impact of Medical Scribes on Physician Electronic Health Record Documentation Practices: A Quantitative Analysis Across a Large, Integrated Health-System.

IF 2.4 3区 医学 Q1 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine Pub Date : 2024-03-01 DOI:10.3122/jabfm.2023.230211R2
Sarah T Florig, Sky Corby, Tanuj Devara, Nicole G Weiskopf, Jeffrey A Gold, Vishnu Mohan
{"title":"Variable Impact of Medical Scribes on Physician Electronic Health Record Documentation Practices: A Quantitative Analysis Across a Large, Integrated Health-System.","authors":"Sarah T Florig, Sky Corby, Tanuj Devara, Nicole G Weiskopf, Jeffrey A Gold, Vishnu Mohan","doi":"10.3122/jabfm.2023.230211R2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Medical scribes have been utilized to reduce electronic health record (EHR) associated documentation burden. Although evidence suggests benefits to scribes, no large-scale studies have quantitatively evaluated scribe impact on physician documentation across clinical settings. This study aimed to evaluate the effect of scribes on physician EHR documentation behaviors and performance.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This retrospective cohort study used EHR audit log data from a large academic health system to evaluate clinical documentation for all ambulatory encounters between January 2014 and December 2019 to evaluate the effect of scribes on physician documentation behaviors. Scribe services were provided on a first-come, first-served basis on physician request. Based on a physician's scribe use, encounters were grouped into 3 categories: never using a scribe, prescribe (before scribe use), or using a scribe. Outcomes included chart closure time, the proportion of delinquent charts, and charts closed after-hours.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Three hundred ninety-five physicians (23% scribe users) across 29 medical subspecialties, encompassing 1,132,487 encounters, were included in the analysis. At baseline, scribe users had higher chart closure time, delinquent charts, and after-hours documentation than physicians who never used scribes. Among scribe users, the difference in outcome measures postscribe compared with baseline varied, and using a scribe rarely resulted in outcome measures approaching a range similar to the performance levels of nonusing physicians. In addition, there was variability in outcome measures across medical specialties and within similar subspecialties.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Although scribes may improve documentation efficiency among some physicians, not all will improve EHR-related documentation practices. Different strategies may help to optimize documentation behaviors of physician-scribe dyads and maximize outcomes of scribe implementation.</p>","PeriodicalId":50018,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine","volume":"37 2","pages":"228-241"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3122/jabfm.2023.230211R2","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Medical scribes have been utilized to reduce electronic health record (EHR) associated documentation burden. Although evidence suggests benefits to scribes, no large-scale studies have quantitatively evaluated scribe impact on physician documentation across clinical settings. This study aimed to evaluate the effect of scribes on physician EHR documentation behaviors and performance.

Methods: This retrospective cohort study used EHR audit log data from a large academic health system to evaluate clinical documentation for all ambulatory encounters between January 2014 and December 2019 to evaluate the effect of scribes on physician documentation behaviors. Scribe services were provided on a first-come, first-served basis on physician request. Based on a physician's scribe use, encounters were grouped into 3 categories: never using a scribe, prescribe (before scribe use), or using a scribe. Outcomes included chart closure time, the proportion of delinquent charts, and charts closed after-hours.

Results: Three hundred ninety-five physicians (23% scribe users) across 29 medical subspecialties, encompassing 1,132,487 encounters, were included in the analysis. At baseline, scribe users had higher chart closure time, delinquent charts, and after-hours documentation than physicians who never used scribes. Among scribe users, the difference in outcome measures postscribe compared with baseline varied, and using a scribe rarely resulted in outcome measures approaching a range similar to the performance levels of nonusing physicians. In addition, there was variability in outcome measures across medical specialties and within similar subspecialties.

Conclusion: Although scribes may improve documentation efficiency among some physicians, not all will improve EHR-related documentation practices. Different strategies may help to optimize documentation behaviors of physician-scribe dyads and maximize outcomes of scribe implementation.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
医疗抄写员对医生电子健康记录文档实践的不同影响:大型综合医疗系统的定量分析。
背景:医疗抄写员被用来减轻与电子健康记录(EHR)相关的文档记录负担。虽然有证据表明代写员能带来好处,但还没有大规模的研究对代写员在不同临床环境下对医生文档记录的影响进行定量评估。本研究旨在评估代写员对医生电子病历文档行为和绩效的影响:这项回顾性队列研究使用了一家大型学术医疗系统的 EHR 审计日志数据,评估了 2014 年 1 月至 2019 年 12 月期间所有门诊就诊的临床文档,以评估代笔对医生文档记录行为的影响。根据医生的要求,代笔服务以先到先得的方式提供。根据医生使用代笔人的情况,将就诊情况分为三类:从未使用代笔人、开处方(在使用代笔人之前)或使用代笔人。结果包括病历关闭时间、拖欠病历的比例以及下班后关闭的病历:分析对象包括 29 个医学亚专科的 395 名医生(23% 使用代笔人),共涉及 1,132,487 次诊疗。与从未使用过代写员的医生相比,使用代写员的医生在基线上的病历关闭时间、拖欠病历和下班后文档记录都更长。在使用抄写员的医生中,使用后的结果指标与基线的差异各不相同,使用抄写员很少能使结果指标接近未使用抄写员的医生的绩效水平。此外,不同医学专科和类似亚专科的结果测量也存在差异:结论:尽管代写员可以提高部分医生的文档记录效率,但并非所有医生都能改善电子病历相关的文档记录实践。不同的策略可能有助于优化医生-处方二人组的文档记录行为,并最大限度地提高代笔实施的效果。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.90
自引率
6.90%
发文量
168
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Published since 1988, the Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine ( JABFM ) is the official peer-reviewed journal of the American Board of Family Medicine (ABFM). Believing that the public and scientific communities are best served by open access to information, JABFM makes its articles available free of charge and without registration at www.jabfm.org. JABFM is indexed by Medline, Index Medicus, and other services.
期刊最新文献
Answering the "100 Most Important Family Medicine Research Questions" from the 1985 Hames Consortium. CERA: A Vehicle for Facilitating Research in Family Medicine. Current and Future Challenges to Publishing Family Medicine Research. Diversity in Family Medicine Research. Leveraging the All of Us Database for Primary Care Research with Large Datasets.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1