Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The Impact of EMRs on Communication Within the Doctor-Patient Relationship

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Distracted Doctoring

Abstract

This chapter addresses the impact of electronic medical record (EMR) use on the patient–doctor relationship and communication. It starts by defining the principles of patient–centered care, explores the phenomena of treating the “iPatient” on the screen while ignoring the real patient, and discusses the myth of multitasking in the context of EMR use with patients. The chapter summarizes current research findings on how EMR use alters the patient–doctor interaction and outlines physician behaviors that may have a positive or negative impact on the clinical encounter and patient perceptions. In addition, the chapter presents evidence-based best practices to foster patient-centered communication, promote patient engagement, education, and shared decision making. Lastly, strategies to teach best practices as well as an institutional model for a longitudinal curriculum of EMR-based communication skills is provided.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 69.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 99.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Blumenthal D. Launching HITECH. N Engl J Med. 2010;362:382–38.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Schoen C, Osborn R, Squires D, et al. A survey of primary care doctors in ten countries shows progress in use of health information technology, less in other areas. Health Aff. 2012;31:2805–16.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Hsiao C-J, Hing E. Use and characteristics of electronic health record systems among office-based physician practices: United States, 2001–2013. NCHS data brief, no 143. Hyattsville: National Center for Health Statistics; 2014.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Toll E. The cost of technology. JAMA. 2012;307(23):2497–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Ventres W, Kooienga S, Vuckovic N, et al. Physicians, patients, and the electronic health record: an ethnographic analysis. Ann Fam Med. 2006;4(2):124–31.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  6. Frankel R, Altschuler A, George S, et al. Effects of exam-room computing on clinician–patient communication: a longitudinal qualitative study. J Gen Intern Med. 2005;20(8):677–82.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  7. Hsu J, Huang J, Fung V, et al. Health information technology and physician-patient reactions: impact of computers on communication during outpatient primary care visits. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2005;12:474–80.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  8. Rosen P, Spalding SJ, Hannon MJ, et al. Parent satisfaction with the electronic medical record in an academic pediatric rheumatology practice. J Med Internet Res. 2011;13(2):e40.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  9. Furness ND, Bradford OJ, Paterson MP. Tablets in trauma: using mobile computing platforms to improve patient understanding and experience. Orthopedics. 2013;36(3):205–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Weaver RR. Informatics tools and medical communication: patient perspectives of “knowledge coupling” in primary care. Health Commun. 2003;15(1):59–78.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Institute of Medicine [IOM]. Crossing the quality chasm: a new health system for the 21st century. Washington, D.C: National Academy Press; 2001.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Davis K, Schoenbaum SC, Audet A-M. A 2020 vision of patient-centered primary care. J Gen Intern Med. 2005;20(10):953–7.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  13. Levinson W, Roter DB, Mullooly JB, Dull VT, Frankel RM. The relationship with malpractice claims among primary care physicians and surgeons. JAMA. 1997;277:553–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Bertakis KD, Azari R. Patient-centered care is associated with decreased health care utilization. J Am Board Fam Med. 2011;24(3):229–39.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Roter DL, Stewart M, Putnam SM, Lipkin M, Stiles W, Inui TS. Communication patterns of primary care physicians. JAMA. 1997;227:350–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Roter D. Which facets of communication have strong effects on outcome: a meta-analysis. In: Stewart M, Roter D, editors. Communicating with medical patients. Newbury Park: Sage; 1989.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Epstein RM, Fiscella K, Lesser CS, Stange KC. Why the nation needs a policy push on patient-centered health care. Health Aff. 2010;29(8):1489–95.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Epstein RM, Street RL. The values and value of patient-centered care. Ann Fam Med. 2011;9(2):100–3.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  19. Epstein RM, Hundert EM. Defining and assessing professional competence. JAMA. 2002;287(2):226–35.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Biagioli FE, Elliot DL, Palmer RT, Graichen CC, et al. The electronic health record objective structured clinical examination: assessing student competency in patient interactions while using the electronic health record. Acad Med. 2016;92(1):87–91. epub ahead of print. doi:10.1097/ACM.0000000000001276.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Verghese A. Culture shock — patient as icon, icon as patient. N Engl J Med. 2008;359:2748–51.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Verghese A. A doctor’s touch. 2011. Available from: https://www.ted.com/talks/abraham_verghese_a_doctor_s_touch?language=en.

  23. Sah S. Investigations before examinations “this is how we practice medicine here”. JAMA Intern Med. 2015;175(3):342–3.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Stickrath C, Noble M, Prochazka A, Anderson M, Griffiths M, Manheim J, et al. Attending rounds in the current era: what is and is not happening. JAMA Intern Med. 2013;173(12):1084–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Ward DR, Ghali WA, Graham A, Lemaire JB. A real-time locating system observes physician time-motion patterns during walk-rounds: a pilot study. BMC Med Educ. 2014;14:37.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  26. Sinsky C, Colligan L, Li L, Prgomet M, Reynolds S, Goeders L, et al. Allocation of physician time in ambulatory practice: a time and motion study in 4 specialties. Ann Intern Med. 2016;165(11):753–760. [Epub ahead of print 6 September 2016]. doi:10.7326/M16-0961.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Health Data.gov. National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey (NAMCS). Available at: https://www.healthdata.gov/dataset/national-ambulatory-medical-care-survey-namcs.

  28. Friedberg MW, Chen PG, VanBUsum KR, et al. Factors affecting physician professional satisfaction and their implications for patient care, health systems, and health policy. Available at: http://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RR439.html.

  29. Shanafelt TD, Dyrbye LN, Sinsky C, et al. Relationship between clerical burden and characteristics of the electronic environment with physician burnout and professional satisfaction. Mayo Clin Proc. 2016;91(7):836–48.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Margalit RS, Roter D, Dunevant MA, Larson S, Reis S. Electronic medical record use and physician-patient communication: an observational study of Israeli primary care encounters. Patient Educ Couns. 2006;61(1):134–41.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Gadd CS, Penrod LE. Dichotomy between physicians’ and patients’ attitues regarding EMR use during put patient encounters. Proc AMIA Symp. 2000:275–279. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2243826/

  32. Greatback D, Heath C, Campion P, et al. How do desktop computers affect the doctor paitne relationship? Fam Pract. 1995;12(1):32–6.

    Google Scholar 

  33. Montague E, Asan O. Considering social ergonomics: the effects of HIT on interpersonal relationships between patients and clinicians. Work. 2012;41(Suppl 1):4479–83.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Chandler P, Sweller J. Cognitive load theory and the format of instruction. Cogn Instr. 1991;8(4):293–332.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Sweller J. Cognitive load during problem-solving: effects on learning. Cogn Sci. 1988;12(2):257–85.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Ross S, Forgie S. Distracted doctoring: smartphones before patients? CMAJ. 2012;184(12):1440.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  37. Richtel M. As doctors use more devices, potential for distraction grows. New York Times. 2011. Available at: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/15/health/as-doctors-use-more-devices-potential-for-distraction-grows.html?_r=0.

  38. Halamka JD. Bring your own device. Life as a healthcare CIO. 2011. Available at: http://geekdoctor.blogspot.com/2011/10/bring-your-own-device.html.

  39. Patel BK, Chapman CG, Luo N, Woodruff JN, Arora VM. Impact of mobile tablet computers on internal medicine resident efficiency. Arch Intern Med. 2012;172(5):436–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Versel N. Report: 94 percent of docs have smartphones, but communication gaps persist. Fierce Mobile Healthcare. 2010. Available at: http://www.fiercehealthcare.com/mobile/report-94-percent-docs-have-smartphones-but-communication-gaps-persist.

  41. Dolan B. 72 percent of US physicians use smartphones. MobiHealthNews. 2010. Available at: http://www.mobihealthnews.com/7505/72-percent-of-us-physicians-use-smartphones/.

  42. Chu LF, Erlendson MJ, Sun JS, et al. Mobile computing in medical education: opportunities and challenges. Curr Opin Anaesthesiol. 2012;25(6):699–718.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Chinn S. Medical staff: medStaff update. Distracted doctoring and patient safety: lessons learned. Available at: https://stanfordhealthcare.org/health-care-professionals/medical-staff/medstaff-update/2013-february/201302-distracted-doctoring-and-patient-safety.html.

  44. Watson JM, Strayer DL. Supertaskers: profiles in extraordinary multitasking ability. Psychon Bull Rev. 2010;17(4):479–85.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Booth N, Robinson P. Interference with the patient-doctor relationship- the cultural gap. Lessons from observations. Stud Health Technol Inform. 2002;87:6–9.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Shachak A, Hadas-Dayagi M, Ziv A, et al. Primary care physicians’ use of an electronic medical record system: a cognitive task analysis. J Gen Intern Med. 2009;24:341–8.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  47. Halamka J. Patient order interrupted by text message. 2011. AHRQ patient safety network. Available at: https://psnet.ahrq.gov/webmm/case/257.

  48. Cebul RD, Love TE, Anil K, Jain AK, Hebert CJ. Electronic health records and quality of diabetes care. N Engl J Med. 2011;365:825–33.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Doyle RJ, Wang N, Anthony D, et al. Computers in the examination room and the electronic health record: physicians’ perceived impact on clinical encounters before and after full installation and implementation. Fam Pract. 2012;5:601–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Ventres W, Kooienga S, Marlin R, et al. Clinician style and examination room computers: a video ethnography. Fam Med. 2005;37(4):276–81.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  51. Dowell A, Stubbe M, Scott-Dowell K, et al. Talking with the alien: interaction with computers in the GP consultation. Aust J Prim Health. 2013;19(4):275–82.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Chan WS, Stevenson M, McGLade K. Do general practitioners change how they use the computer during consultations with significant psychological component? Int J Med Inform. 2008;77(8):534–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. Pearce C, Trumble S, Arnold M, Dwan K, Phillips C. Computers in the new consultation: within the first minute. Fam Pract. 2008;25:202–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Shachak A, Reis S. The impact of electronic medical records on patient– doctor communication during consultation: a narrative literature review. J Eval Clin Pract. 2009;15(4):641–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  55. Alkureishi MA, Lee WW, Lyons M, Press VG, Imam S, Nkansah-Amankra A, Werner D, Arora VM. Impact of electronic medical record use on the patient-doctor relationship and communication: a systematic review. J Gen Intern Med. 2016;31(5):548–60.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  56. Kazmi Z. Effects of exam room EHR use on doctor-patient communication: a systematic literature review. Inform Prim Care. 2013;21(1):30–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. Crampton NH, Reis S, Shachak A. Computers in the clinical encounter: a scoping review and thematic analysis. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2016;23(3):654–65.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  58. Fiks AG, Alessandrini EA, Forrest CB, et al. Electronic medical record use in pediatric primary care. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2011;18(1):38–44.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  59. Kumarapeli P, de Lusignan S. Using the computer in the clinical consultation; setting the stage, reviewing, recording, and taking actions: multi-channel video study. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2013;20(e1):e67–75.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  60. Montague E, Asan O. Dynamic modeling of patient and physician eye gaze to understand the effects of electronic health record on doctor-patient communication an attention. Int J Med Inform. 2014;83(3):225–34.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  61. Gibblings-Isaac D, Iqbal M, Tahir MA, et al. The pattern of silent time in the clinical consultation: an observational multichannel video study. Fam Prac. 2012;29(5):616–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  62. Booth A, Lecouteur A, Chur-Hansen A. The impact of the desktop computer on rheumatologist-patient consultations. Clin Rheumatol. 2013;32(3):391–3.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  63. Montague E, Chen P, Xu J, Chewning B, Barrett B. Nonverbal interpersonal interactions in clinical encounters and patient perceptions of empathy. J Participat Med. 2013;5:e33.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  64. McGrath JM, Arar NH, Pugh JA. The influence of electronic medical record usage on nonverbal communication in the medical interview. Health Informatics J. 2007;13(2):105–18.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  65. Asan O, Young HN, Chewning B, Montague E. How physician electronic health record screen sharing affects patient and doctor non-verbal communication in primary care. Patient Educ Couns. 2015;98(3):310–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  66. Als AB. The desk-top computer as a magic box: patterns of behaviour connected with the desk-top computer; GPs’ and patients’ perceptions. Fam Pract. 1997;14(1):17–23.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  67. Noordman J, Verhaak P, van Beljouw I, et al. Consulting room computers and their effect on general practitioner-patient communication. Fam Pract. 2010;27(6):644–51.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  68. Street RL Jr, Liu L, Farber NJ. Etal. Provider interaction with the electronic health record: the effect son patient-centered communication in medical encounters. Patient Educ Couns. 2014;96(3):315–9.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  69. Makoul G, Curry RH, Tang PC. The use of electronic medical records: communication patterns in outpatient encounters. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2001;8(6):610–5.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  70. Booth N, Robinson P, Kohannejad J. Identification of high-quality consultation practice in primary care: the effects of computer use on doctor-patient rapport. Inform Prim Care. 2004;12(2):75–83.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  71. Arar NH, Wen L, McGrath J, et al. Communicating about emotions during primary care outpatient visits: the role of electronic medical records. Inform Prim Care. 2005;13(1):13–22.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  72. Johnson KB, Serwint JR, Fagan LA, et al. Computer-based documentation: effects on patient-provider communication during pediatric health maintenance encounters. Pediatrics. 2008;122(3):509–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  73. Saleem JJ, Flanagan ME, Russ AL, McMullen CK, Elli L, Russell SA, Bennett KJ, Matthias MS, Rehman SU, Schwartz MD, Frankel RM. You and me and the computer makes three: variations in exam room use of the electronic health record. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2014;21(e1):e147–51.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  74. Hirsch O, Keller H, Krones T, Donner-Banzhoff N. Arriba-lib: association of an evidence-based electronic library of decision aids with communication and decision-making in patients and primary care physicians. Int J Evid Based Healthc. 2012;10(1):68–76.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  75. Shachak A, Domb S, Reis S et al. The computer as a third party in the clinical encounter, Health computer management. Available at: https://chec-cesc.afmc.ca/sites/default/files/documents/studyguide-hcm_computer_en_0.pdf.

  76. Aydin CE, Rosen PN, Jewell SM, et al. Computers in the examining room: the patient’s perspective. Proc Annu Symp Comput Appl Med Care. 1995:824–8. http://europepmc.org/articles/PMC2579209

  77. Callen JL, Bevis M, McIntosh JH. Patients’ perceptions of general practitioners using computers during the patient–doctor consultation. HIM J. 2005;34(1):8–12.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  78. Freeman MC, Taylor AP, Adelman JU. Electronic medical record system in a headache specialty practice: a patient satisfaction survey. Headache. 2009;49(2):212–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  79. Rouf E, Whittle J, Lu N, Schwartz MD. Computers in the exam room: differences in physician–patient interaction may be due to physician experience. J Gen Intern Med. 2007;22(1):43–8.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  80. Almquist JR, Kelly C, Bromberg J, et al. Consultation room design and the clinical encounter: the space and interaction randomized trial. HERD. 2009;3(1):41–78.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  81. McCord G, Pendleton BF, Schrop SL, et al. Assessing the impact on patient–physician interaction when physicians use personal digital assistants: a northeastern Ohio network (NEON) study. J Am Board Fam Med. 2009;22:353.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  82. Strayer SM, Semler MW, Kington ML, et al. Patient attitudes toward physician use of tablet computers in the exam room. Fam Med. 2010;42(9):643–7.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  83. 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):1471–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  84. Lelievre S, Schultz K. Does computer use in patient–physician encounters influence patient satisfaction? Can Fam Physician. 2010;56(1):e6–12.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  85. Al Jafar E. Exploring patient satisfaction before and after electronic health record (EHR) implementation: the Kuwait experience. Perspect Health Inf Manag. 2013;10:1c.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  86. Garrison GM, Bernard ME, Rasmussen NH. 21st-century health care: the effect of computer use by physicians on patient satisfaction at a family medicine clinic. Fam Med. 2002;34(5):362–8.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  87. Nagy VT, Kanter MH. Implementing the electronic medical record in the exam room: the effect on physician–patient communication and patient satisfaction. Perm J. 2007;11(2):21–4.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  88. Stewart RF, Kroth PJ, Schuyler M, et al. Do electronic health records affect the patient-psychiatrist relationship? A before & after study of psychiatric outpatients. BMC Psychiatry. 2010;10:3.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  89. Fairley CK, Vodstrcil LA, Huffam S, et al. Evaluation of electronic medical record (EMR) at large urban primary care sexual health centre. PLoS One. 2013;8(4):e60636.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  90. Safran C, Jones PC, Rind D, et al. Electronic communication and collaboration in a health care practice. Artif Intell Med. 1998;12(2):137–51.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  91. Shield RR, Goldman RE, Anthony DA, et al. Gradual electronic health record implementation: new insights on physician and patient adaptation. Ann Fam Med. 2010;8(4):316–26.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  92. Pandit RR, Boland MV. The impact of an electronic health record transition on a glaucoma subspecialty practice. Ophthalmology. 2013;120(4):753–60.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  93. Lee WW, Alkureishi MA, Ukabiala O, Venable LR, Ngooi SS, Staisiunas DD, Wroblewski KE, Arora VM. Patient perceptions of electronic medical record use by faculty and resident physicians: a mixed methods study. J Gen Intern Med. 2016;31(11):1315–22.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  94. Alkureishi ML, Lee WW, Farnan J, Arora V. Breaking away from the iPatient to care for the real patient: implementing a patient-centered EMR use curriculum. MedEdPORTAL. 2014. Available at: www.mededportal.org/publication/9953.

  95. Mann WR, Slaboch J. Computers in the exam room — friend or foe? Perm J. 2004;8(4):49–51.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  96. CanMEDS: better standards, better physicians, better care. 2015. Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Canada. Available at: http://www.royalcollege.ca/rcsite/canmeds/framework/canmeds-role-communicator-e.

  97. Mintz M, Narvarte HJ, O'Brien KE, Papp KK, Thomas M, Durning SJ. Use of electronic medical records by physicians and students in academic internal medicine settings. Acad Med. 2009;84(12):1698–704.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  98. Hammoud MM, Dalymple JL, Christner JG, Stewart RA, Fisher J, Margo K, et al. Medical student documentation in electronic health records: a collaborative statement from the alliance for clinical education (ACE). Teach Learn Med. 2012;24(3):257–66.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  99. Graham-Jones P, Jain SH, Friedman CP, Marcotte L, Blumenthal D. The need to incorporate health information technology into physicians' education and professional development. Health Aff (Millwood). 2012;31(3):481–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  100. Babbott S, Manwell LB, Brown R, Montague E, Williams E, Schwartz M, Hess E, Linzer M. Electronic medical records and physician stress in primary care: results from the MEMO study. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2014;21(e1):e100–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  101. Hojat M, Louis D, Maxwell K, Markham F, Wender R, Gonnella J. Patient perceptions of physician empathy, satisfaction with physician, interpersonal trust, and compliance. Int J Med Educ. 2010;1:83–7.

    Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  102. Rakel D, Barrett B, Zhang Z, Hoeft T, Chewning B, Marchand L, Scheder J. Perception of empathy in the therapeutic encounter: effects on the common cold. Patient Educ Couns. 2011;85(3):390–7.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Medicine, University of Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA

    Wei Wei Lee MD, MPH

  2. Academic Pediatrics, University of Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA

    Maria Lolita Alkureishi MD, FAAP

Authors
  1. Wei Wei Lee MD, MPH
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Maria Lolita Alkureishi MD, FAAP
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Wei Wei Lee MD, MPH .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. University of Rochester Medical Center, Pittsford, New York, USA

    Peter J. Papadakos

  2. Department of Languages, Literatures and Cultures, The University of Windsor, Windsor, Ontario, Canada

    Stephen Bertman

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2017 Springer International Publishing AG

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Lee, W.W., Alkureishi, M.L. (2017). The Impact of EMRs on Communication Within the Doctor-Patient Relationship. In: Papadakos, P., Bertman, S. (eds) Distracted Doctoring. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-48707-6_9

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-48707-6_9

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-48706-9

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-48707-6

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation