Structured Data Entry in the Electronic Medical Record: Perspectives of Pediatric Specialty Physicians and Surgeons

  • Ruth A. Bush
  • Cynthia Kuelbs
  • Julie Ryu
  • Wen Jiang
  • George Chiang
Systems-Level Quality Improvement
  • 314 Downloads
Part of the following topical collections:
  1. Systems-Level Quality Improvement

Abstract

The Epic electronic health record (EHR) platform supports structured data entry systems (SDES), which allow developers, with input from users, to create highly customized patient-record templates in order to maximize data completeness and to standardize structure. There are many potential advantages of using discrete data fields in the EHR to capture data for secondary analysis and epidemiological research, but direct data acquisition from clinicians remains one of the largest obstacles to leveraging the EHR for secondary use. Physician resistance to SDES is multifactorial. A 35-item questionnaire based on Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology, was used to measure attitudes, facilitation, and potential incentives for adopting SDES for clinical documentation among 25 pediatric specialty physicians and surgeons. Statistical analysis included chi-square for categorical data as well as independent sample t-tests and analysis of variance for continuous variables. Mean scores of the nine constructs demonstrated primarily positive physician attitudes toward SDES, while the surgeons were neutral. Those under 40 were more likely to respond that facilitating conditions for structured entry existed as compared to the two older age groups (p = .02). Pediatric surgeons were significantly less positive than specialty physicians about SDES effects on Performance (p = .01) and the effect of Social Influence (p = .02); but in more agreement that use of forms was voluntary (p = .02). Attitudinal differences likely reflect medical training, clinical practice workflows, and division specific practices. Identified resistance indicate efforts to increase SDES adoption should be discipline-targeted rather than a uniform approach.

Keywords

Electronic health records Health information technology Pediatrics Physicians Survey 

Notes

Acknowledgments

This project was supported in part by grant number K99/R00 HS022404 from the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. 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.

References

  1. 1.
    Rosenbloom, S. T., Denny, J. C., Xu, H., Lorenzi, N., Stead, W. W., and Johnson, K. B., Data from clinical notes: a perspective on the tension between structure and flexible documentation. J. Am. Med. Inform. Assoc. 18(2):181–186, 2011. doi: 10.1136/jamia.2010.007237.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Epic Electronic Health Record [Computer software]. Madison, WI: Epic.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Rosenbloom, S. T., Miller, R. A., Johnson, K. B., Elkin, P. L., and Brown, S. H., Interface terminologies: facilitating direct entry of clinical data into electronic health record systems. J. Am. Med. Inform. Assoc. 13(3):277–288, 2006. doi: 10.1197/jamia.M1957.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Johnson, S. B., Bakken, S., Dine, D., Hyun, S., Mendonça, E., Morrison, F., et al., An electronic health record based on structured narrative. J. Am. Med. Inform. Assoc. 15(1):54–64, 2008. doi: 10.1197/jamia.M2131.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Gilbert, J. A., Physician data entry: providing options is essential. Health Data. Manag. 6(9):84–6,88,90–92, 1998. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10185232.
  6. 6.
    Leu, M.G., O’Connor, K. G., Marshall, R., Price, D. T., and Klein, J. D., Pediatricians’ use of health information technology: a national survey. Pediatrics. 130(6):e1441–e1446, 2012. doi: 10.1542/peds.2012-0396.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Murray, T., and Berberian, L., The importance of structured data elements in EHRs. Computer World, (2011, Mar). http://www.computerworld.com/article/2470987/healthcare-it/the-importance-of-structured-data-elements-in-ehrs.html.
  8. 8.
    Marill, K. A., Gauharou, E. S., Nelson, B. K., Peterson, M. A., Curtis, R. L., and Gonzalez, M. R., Prospective, randomized trial of template-assisted versus undirected written recording of physician records in the emergency department. Ann. Emerg. Med. 33(5):500–509, 1999. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10216325.
  9. 9.
    Duyck, P., Pynoo, B., Devolder, P., Voet, T., Adang, L., and Vercruysse, J., User acceptance of a picture archiving and communication system. Applying the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology in a radiological setting. Methods Inf. Med. 47(2):149–156, 2008. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18338086.
  10. 10.
    Venkatesh, V., Morris, M., Davis, G., and Davis, F., User acceptance of information technology: toward a unified view. MIS Quart. 27(3):425–478, 2003. doi: 10.2307/30036540.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    IBM Corp. Released, IBM SPSS statistics for windows, version 21.0. IBM Corp: Armonk, NY, 2012.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Scheepers, R. A., Lombarts, K. M., van Aken, M. A., Heineman, M. J., and Arah, O. A., Personality traits affect teaching performance of attending physicians: results of a multi-center observational study. PLoS One. 9(5):e98107, 2014. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0098107.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Boonstra, A., and Broekhuis, M., Barriers to the acceptance of electronic medical records by physicians from systematic review to taxonomy and interventions. BMC Health Serv. Res. 10:231, 2010. doi: 10.1186/1472-6963-10-231.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Kruse, C. S., Kristof, C., Jones, B., Mitchell, E., and Martinez, A., Barriers to electronic health record adoption: a systematic literature review. J. Med. Syst. 40(12):252, 2016. doi: 10.1007/s10916-016-0628-9.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Ben-Zion, R., Pliskin, N., and Fink, L., Critical success factors for adoption of electronic health record systems: literature review and prescriptive analysis. Inf. Syst. Manag. 31(4):296–312, 2014. doi: 10.1080/10580530.2014.958024.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ruth A. Bush
    • 1
    • 2
  • Cynthia Kuelbs
    • 3
  • Julie Ryu
    • 3
  • Wen Jiang
    • 4
  • George Chiang
    • 5
  1. 1.Beyster Institute for Nursing ResearchUniversity of San DiegoSan DiegoUSA
  2. 2.Clinical InformaticsRady Children’s HospitalSan DiegoUSA
  3. 3.Department of PediatricsUniversity of CaliforniaSan DiegoUSA
  4. 4.Department of SurgeryUniversity of CaliforniaSan DiegoUSA
  5. 5.Rady Children’s Institute of Genomic MedicineSan DiegoUSA

Personalised recommendations