Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Use of electronic clinical documentation: time spent and team interactions

Use of electronic clinical documentation: time spent and team interactions AbstractObjective To measure the time spent authoring and viewing documentation and to study patterns of usage in healthcare practice.Design Audit logs for an electronic health record were used to calculate rates, and social network analysis was applied to ascertain usage patterns. Subjects comprised all care providers at an urban academic medical center who authored or viewed electronic documentation.Measurement Rate and time of authoring and viewing clinical documentation, and associations among users were measured.Results Users spent 20–103 min per day authoring notes and 7–56 min per day viewing notes, with physicians spending less than 90 min per day total. About 16% of attendings' notes, 8% of residents' notes, and 38% of nurses' notes went unread by other users, and, overall, 16% of notes were never read by anyone. Viewing of notes dropped quickly with the age of the note, but notes were read at a low but measurable rate, even after 2 years. Most healthcare teams (77%) included a nurse, an attending, and a resident, and those three users' groups were the first to write notes during an admission.Limitations The limitations were restriction to a single academic medical center and use of log files without direct observation.Conclusions Care providers spend a significant amount of time viewing and authoring notes. Many notes are never read, and rates of usage vary significantly by author and viewer. While the rate of viewing a note drops quickly with its age, even after 2 years inpatient notes are still viewed. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association Oxford University Press

Use of electronic clinical documentation: time spent and team interactions

Loading next page...
 
/lp/oxford-university-press/use-of-electronic-clinical-documentation-time-spent-and-team-fR8j2oUtxZ

References (22)

Publisher
Oxford University Press
Copyright
© 2011, Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://group.bmj.com/group/rights-licensing/permissions.
ISSN
1067-5027
eISSN
1527-974X
DOI
10.1136/jamia.2010.008441
pmid
21292706
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

AbstractObjective To measure the time spent authoring and viewing documentation and to study patterns of usage in healthcare practice.Design Audit logs for an electronic health record were used to calculate rates, and social network analysis was applied to ascertain usage patterns. Subjects comprised all care providers at an urban academic medical center who authored or viewed electronic documentation.Measurement Rate and time of authoring and viewing clinical documentation, and associations among users were measured.Results Users spent 20–103 min per day authoring notes and 7–56 min per day viewing notes, with physicians spending less than 90 min per day total. About 16% of attendings' notes, 8% of residents' notes, and 38% of nurses' notes went unread by other users, and, overall, 16% of notes were never read by anyone. Viewing of notes dropped quickly with the age of the note, but notes were read at a low but measurable rate, even after 2 years. Most healthcare teams (77%) included a nurse, an attending, and a resident, and those three users' groups were the first to write notes during an admission.Limitations The limitations were restriction to a single academic medical center and use of log files without direct observation.Conclusions Care providers spend a significant amount of time viewing and authoring notes. Many notes are never read, and rates of usage vary significantly by author and viewer. While the rate of viewing a note drops quickly with its age, even after 2 years inpatient notes are still viewed.

Journal

Journal of the American Medical Informatics AssociationOxford University Press

Published: Mar 2, 2011

There are no references for this article.