Advertisement

Journal of General Internal Medicine

, Volume 34, Issue 1, pp 132–136 | Cite as

Effect on VA Patient Satisfaction of Provider’s Use of an Integrated Viewer of Multiple Electronic Health Records

  • Aaron Legler
  • Megan Price
  • Megha Parikh
  • Jonathan R. Nebeker
  • Merry C. Ward
  • Linda Wedemeyer
  • Steven D. PizerEmail author
Original Research

Abstract

Purpose

To examine associations between patient perceptions that their provider was knowledgeable of their medical history and clinicians’ early adoption of an application that presents providers with an integrated longitudinal view of a patient’s electronic health records (EHR) from multiple healthcare systems.

Method

This retrospective analysis utilizes provider audit logs from the Veterans Health Administration Joint Legacy Viewer (JLV) and patient responses to the Survey of Patient Healthcare Experiences Patient-Centered Medical Home (SHEP/PCMH) patient satisfaction survey (FY2016) to assess the relationship between the primary care provider being an early adopter of JLV and patient perception of the provider’s knowledge of their medical history. Multivariate logistic regression models were used to control for patient age, race, sex education, health status, duration of patient-provider relationship, and provider characteristics.

Results

The study used responses from 203,903 patients to the SHEP-PCMH survey in FY2016 who received outpatient primary care services from 11,421 unique providers. Most (91%) clinicians had no JLV utilization in the 6 months prior to the studied patient visit. Controlling for patient demographics, length of the patient-provider relationship, and provider and facility characteristics, being an early adopter of the JLV system was associated with a 14% (adj OR 1.14, p < 0.000) increased odds that patients felt their provider was knowledgeable about their medical history. When evaluating the interaction between duration of patient-provider relationship and being an early adopter of JLV, a greater effect was seen with patient-provider relationships that were greater than 3 years (adj OR 1.23, p < 0.000), compared to those less than 3 years.

Conclusions

Increasing the interoperability of medical information systems has the potential to improve both patient care and patient experience of care. This study demonstrates that early adopters of an integrated view of electronic health records from multiple delivery systems are more likely to have their patients report that their clinician was knowledgeable of their medical history. With provider payments often linked to patient satisfaction performance metrics, investments in interoperability may be worthwhile.

KEY WORDS

electronic medical record (EMR) electronic health record (EHR) health information exchange (HIE) health information technology (HIT) interoperability patient satisfaction 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The authors wish to thank David Schmidt for helpful comments on prior versions of this work and for logistical assistance.

Funding Information

This research was supported by the VA Office of Health Informatics and by Grant Number PEC 16-001 from the VA Quality Enhancement Research Initiative (QUERI). Opinions and conclusions expressed are those of the authors and do not reflect the official position of the US Department of Veterans Affairs, the University of Utah, or Boston University.

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that they do not have a conflict of interest.

References

  1. 1.
    Dick RS, Steen EB, Detmer DE. The Computer-Based Patient Record. An Essential Technology for Health Care. 1997; 1–256.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Roter DL, Frankel RM, Hall JA, Sluyter D. The Expression of Emotion Through Nonverbal Behavior in Medical Visits. J Gen Intern Med 2006; 21(S1): S28–34. Available from: doi:  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1525-1497.2006.00306.x [Accessed 20th September 2017].
  3. 3.
    Waitzkin H. Doctor-Patient Communication: Clinical Implications of Social Scientific Research. JAMA 1984; 252(17): 2441–2446. Available from: doi: https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.1984.03350170043017 [Accessed September 20, 2017].
  4. 4.
    Helmer, D.A., Rowneki, M., Feng, X., Tseng, C.L., Rose, D., Soroka, O., Fried, D., Jani, N., Pogach, L.M. and Sambamoorthi, U., 2018. State-Level Variability in Veteran Reliance on Veterans Health Administration and Potentially Preventable Hospitalizations: A Geospatial Analysis. INQUIRY, 55, p.0046958018756216. Available from: DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1177/0046958018756216 journals.sagepub.com/home/inq [Accessed April 4, 2018].
  5. 5.
    Pizer, S.D. and Gardner, J.A., 2011. Is fragmented financing bad for your health? INQUIRY, 48(2), pp. 109–122. Available from: http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.5034/inquiryjrnl_48.02.02 [Accessed April 4, 2018].CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Department of Veterans Affairs (VA): Office of Information and Technology (OI&T). Joint Legacy Viewer (JLV) 2.5.1 User Guide: 1–67, December 2016. Available from: https://www.va.gov/vdl/documents/Clinical/Joint_Legacy_Viewer_(JLV)/jlv2_5_2_userguide.pdf[Accessed 10th April 2018].
  7. 7.
    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. J Fam Med 2002; 34(5): 362–8. https://s3.amazonaws.com/academia.edu.documents/46601611/st-century_health_care_the_effect_of_com20160618-6895-jthcz.pdf?AWSAccessKeyId=AKIAIWOWYYGZ2Y53UL3A&Expires=1505932227&Signature=99J%2B7NdnKQGDatTEvz0BeSc%2BY%2B4%3D&response-content-disposition=inline%3B%20filename%3D21ST-CENTURY_Health_Care_The_Effect_of_C.pdf [Accessed 20th September 2017].
  8. 8.
    Hsu J, Huang J, Fung V, Robertson N, Jamison H, Frankel R. Health Information Technology and Physician-Patient Interactions: Impact of Computers on Communication during Outpatient Primary Care Visits. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2005; 12(4): 474–80. Available from:  https://doi.org/10.1197/jamia.M1741 [Accessed September 20, 2017].
  9. 9.
    Jarvis B, Johnson T, Butler P, O’Shaughnessy K, Fullam F, Tran L, Gupta R. Assessing the Impact of Electronic Health Records as Enabler of Hospital Quality and Patient Satisfaction. Acad Med 2013; 88(10): 1471–77. Available from: doi:  https://doi.org/10.1097/ACM.0b013e3182a36cab [Accessed September 20, 2017].
  10. 10.
    VA Information Resource Center (VIReC). Survey of Healthcare Experiences of Patients (SHEP) Data. SHEP Data Overview. Available from: http://vaww.virec.research.va.gov/SHEP/Overview.htm [Accessed 20th September 2017].
  11. 11.
    Wright S. Partnered Research with the Office of Performance Measurement: An Overview of Existing Data. VHA Office of Analytics and Business Intelligence. Available from: https://www.hsrd.research.va.gov/for_researchers/cyber_seminars/archives/962-notes.pdf [Accessed 20th September 2017].
  12. 12.
    StataCorp. Stata Statistical Software: Release 14. College Station, TX: StataCorp LP.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    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): 105–118. Available from: DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1460458207076466 [Accessed September 20, 2017].
  14. 14.
    O’Malley AS, Grossman JM, Cohen GR, Kemper NM, and Pham HH. Are Electronic Medical Records Helpful for Care Coordination? Experiences of Physician Practices. J Gen Intern Med 2009; 25(3): 177–85. Available from: doi:  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11606-009-1195-2 [Accessed September 20, 2017].

Copyright information

© Society of General Internal Medicine 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Aaron Legler
    • 1
  • Megan Price
    • 1
  • Megha Parikh
    • 1
  • Jonathan R. Nebeker
    • 2
    • 3
    • 4
  • Merry C. Ward
    • 4
  • Linda Wedemeyer
    • 4
  • Steven D. Pizer
    • 1
    • 5
    Email author
  1. 1.Partnered Evidence-Based Policy Resource Center, VA Boston Healthcare SystemUS Department of Veterans AffairsBostonUSA
  2. 2.Department of MedicineUniversity of Utah School of MedicineSalt Lake CityUSA
  3. 3.Geriatric Research and Education Clinical Center, VA Salt Lake City Health Care SystemUS Department of Veterans AffairsSalt Lake CityUSA
  4. 4.Office of Health InformaticsUS Department of Veterans AffairsLos AngelesUSA
  5. 5.Department of Health Law, Policy, and Management Boston University School of Public HealthBostonUSA

Personalised recommendations