Relationship Between Use of Electronic Health Record Features and Health Care Quality: Results of a Statewide Survey

Background:Electronic health records (EHRs) are widely viewed as useful tools for supporting the provision of high quality healthcare. However, evidence regarding their effectiveness for this purpose is mixed, and existing studies have generally considered EHR usage a binary factor and have not considered the availability and use of specific EHR features. Objective:To assess the relationship between the use of an EHR and the use of specific EHR features with quality of care. Research Design:A statewide mail survey of physicians in Massachusetts conducted in 2005. The results of the survey were linked with Healthcare Effectiveness Data and Information Set (HEDIS) quality measures, and generalized linear regression models were estimated to examine the associations between the use of EHRs and specific EHR features with quality measures, adjusting for physician practice characteristics. Subjects:A stratified random sample of 1884 licensed physicians in Massachusetts, 1345 of whom responded. Of these, 507 had HEDIS measures available and were included in the analysis (measures are only available for primary care providers). Measure:Performance on HEDIS quality measures. Results:The survey had a response rate of 71%. There was no statistically significant association between use of an EHR as a binary factor and performance on any of the HEDIS measure groups. However, there were statistically significant associations between the use of many, but not all, specific EHR features and HEDIS measure group scores. The associations were strongest for the problem list, visit note and radiology test result EHR features and for quality measures relating to women's health, colon cancer screening, and cancer prevention. For example, users of problem list functionality performed better on women's health, depression, colon cancer screening, and cancer prevention measures, with problem list users outperforming nonusers by 3.3% to 9.6% points on HEDIS measure group scores (all significant at the P < 0.05 level). However, these associations were not universal. Conclusions:Consistent with past studies, there was no significant relationship between use of EHR as a binary factor and performance on quality measures. However, availability and use of specific EHR features by primary care physicians was associated with higher performance on certain quality measures. These results suggest that, to maximize health care quality, developers, implementers and certifiers of EHRs should focus on increasing the adoption of robust EHR systems and increasing the use of specific features rather than simply aiming to deploy an EHR regardless of functionality.

[1]  Jonathan M. Teich,et al.  Using information systems to measure and improve quality , 1999, Int. J. Medical Informatics.

[2]  Alastair Baker,et al.  Crossing the Quality Chasm: A New Health System for the 21st Century , 2001, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[3]  D. Bates,et al.  Improving safety with information technology. , 2003, The New England journal of medicine.

[4]  Anne F. Kittler,et al.  A cost-benefit analysis of electronic medical records in primary care. , 2003, The American journal of medicine.

[5]  T. Payne The Value of Computerized Provider Order Entry in Ambulatory Settings , 2003 .

[6]  Douglas S. Bell,et al.  Model Formulation: A Conceptual Framework for Evaluating Outpatient Electronic Prescribing Systems Based on Their Functional Capabilities , 2004, J. Am. Medical Informatics Assoc..

[7]  C. Delpierre,et al.  A systematic review of computer-based patient record systems and quality of care: more randomized clinical trials or a broader approach? , 2004, International journal for quality in health care : journal of the International Society for Quality in Health Care.

[8]  E. Balas,et al.  Improving clinical practice using clinical decision support systems: a systematic review of trials to identify features critical to success , 2005, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[9]  H. Mcdonald,et al.  Effects of computerized clinical decision support systems on practitioner performance and patient outcomes: a systematic review. , 2005, JAMA.

[10]  Terhilda Garrido,et al.  Effect of electronic health records in ambulatory care: retrospective, serial, cross sectional study , 2005, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[11]  David W. Bates,et al.  Position Paper: Factors and Forces Affecting EHR System Adoption: Report of a 2004 ACMI Discussion , 2004, J. Am. Medical Informatics Assoc..

[12]  K. Shojania,et al.  Effects of quality improvement strategies for type 2 diabetes on glycemic control: a meta-regression analysis. , 2006, JAMA.

[13]  P. Shekelle,et al.  Systematic Review: Impact of Health Information Technology on Quality, Efficiency, and Costs of Medical Care , 2006, Annals of Internal Medicine.

[14]  Theodore J Thompson,et al.  The Association between Quality of Care and the Intensity of Diabetes Disease Management Programs , 2006, Annals of Internal Medicine.

[15]  E. Keeler,et al.  Costs and benefits of health information technology. , 2006, Evidence report/technology assessment.

[16]  Steven R. Simon,et al.  Correlates of Electronic Health Record Adoption in Office Practices: A Statewide Survey , 2006, AMIA.

[17]  R. Baron,et al.  Quality Improvement with an Electronic Health Record: Achievable, but Not Automatic , 2007, Annals of Internal Medicine.

[18]  Eric W. Ford,et al.  Incomplete EHR Adoption: Late Uptake of Patient Safety and Cost Control Functions , 2007, American journal of medical quality : the official journal of the American College of Medical Quality.

[19]  D. Bates,et al.  Electronic health record use and the quality of ambulatory care in the United States. , 2007, Archives of internal medicine.

[20]  Sowmya R. Rao,et al.  Electronic health records in ambulatory care--a national survey of physicians. , 2008, The New England journal of medicine.

[21]  Janice A Singer,et al.  The impact of pay-for-performance on health care quality in Massachusetts, 2001-2003. , 2008, Health affairs.