Do family physicians electronic health records support meaningful use?

Peterson, Lars E.; Blackburn, Brenna; Ivins, Douglas; Mitchell, Jason M.; Matson, Christine; Phillips, Robert L.

doi:10.1016/j.hjdsi.2014.11.002

Cited by 6 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…As a case in point, recent analyses of primary care physicians' use of electronic health information to meet Meaningful Use requirements show significant gaps in how many clinicians use their data systems for patient registries (47% no), patient communication (55% no) and other required functionalities [38]. Usability assessments are one point from which to determine how best to assist clinicians in their journey with electronic health information.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessment of the usability and impact of the Idaho Health Data Exchange (IHDE)

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Eighty four health care professionals participated in an online survey assessing the usability, and clinical and administrative impact of the Idaho Health Data Exchange's (IHDE) Virtual Health Record (VHR). The IHDE VHR allows authorized users to use a secure web interface to view lab, radiology and transcribed reports from multiple facilities and view medical histories on patients in the data exchange. Results indicate the usability of the IHDE VHR was almost universally positively rated with the Software Usability Measurement Inventory (SUMI) utilized as the assessment method. Medical providers however had the lowest rating of the exchange, raising concerns about the need for additional training and support. The addition of other Idaho health care organizations to the health data exchange was most widely desired, with the most frequently cited benefit being more comprehensive access to patients' records. In contrast to other published evaluations of health data exchanges in the U.S., few of the concerns emerged about cost of implementation of the data exchange or trust in the quality of information contained therein.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessment of the usability and impact of the Idaho Health Data Exchange (IHDE)

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Despite the fact that most primary care physicians have an electronic health record (EHR), most cannot access or use the data that they contain in any meaningful way (Peterson et al, 2015). These dormant data must be turned into information that can directly inform care and be connected to other data to produce knowledge that can affect population health and more efficient utilization of healthcare resources.…”

Section: A Primary Care Registry: Primementioning

confidence: 99%

Transforming physician certification to support physician self-motivation and capacity to improve quality and safety

Phillips¹,

Kennedy²,

Jaén³

et al. 2016

Journal of Enterprise Transformation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Physician certification boards are an intrinsic part of medical professionalism, and the public is their key stakeholder. A decade ago, the 24 boards of the American Board of Medical Specialties committed to moving beyond the summative evaluation of physicians to a process of continuously evaluating and improving the care they deliver. The American Board of Family Medicine (ABFM) has been a leader in this change and is making strategic investments in the next major evolution of continuous certification. Physicians are frustrated with the pace of change, inability to reliably assess and change their practices, and the perceived risk to both income and professional autonomy. Certifying boards are natural targets for that frustration. Certifying boards have an opportunity to support physicians in improving the quality and safety of healthcare and appeal to physicians' intrinsic motivation for doing so. The ABFM is not retreating from that challenge but is instead listening carefully to family physicians and making strategic investments to evolve. The ABFM is the first certifying board to launch a registry that is designed to support physician capacity for quality assessment, improvement, data-reporting requirements, and population management. It also supports more effective measure development and research. The ABFM aims to help physicians maintain the privilege of self-governance by helping them continuously earn it.

show abstract

“…1 Frontline clinicians continue to report failures of certified electronic health records (EHRs) to meet federal certification requirements and to meet electronic reporting needs, the latter of which is estimated to cost them $15 billion per year. [2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11] Reducing reporting burden and enhancing the portability and utility of clinical data for quality improvement is an American Board of Family Medicine (ABFM) goal that is aligned with federal policy. 12,13 In 2013, the ABFM began development of a Qualified Clinical Data Registry to assist practices whose EHRs were not serving their quality reporting needs and to reduce reporting burden.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Clinical Quality Measure Exchange is Not Easy

Phillips¹,

Peterson²,

Palen

et al. 2021

Ann Fam Med

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PURPOSE The Trial of Aggregate Data Exchange for Maintenance of Certification and Raising Quality was a randomized controlled trial which first had to test whether quality reporting could be a by-product of clinical care. We report on the initial descriptive study of the capacity for and quality of exchange of wholepanel, standardized quality measures from health systems. METHODS Family physicians were recruited from 4 health systems with mature quality measurement programs and agreed to submit standardized, physicianlevel quality measures for consenting physicians. Identified measure or transfer errors were captured and evaluated for root-cause problems. RESULTSThe health systems varied considerably by patient demographics and payer mix. From the 4 systems, 256 family physicians elected to participate. Of 19 measures negotiated for use, 5 were used by all systems. There were more than 15 types of identified errors including breaks in data delivery, changes in measures, and nonsensical measure results. Only 1 system had no identified errors. CONCLUSIONSThe secure transfer of standardized, physician-level quality measures from 4 health systems with mature measure processes proved difficult. There were many errors that required human intervention and manual repair, precluding full automation. This study reconfirms an important problem, namely, that despite widespread health information technology adoption and federal meaningful use policies, we remain far from goals to make clinical quality reporting a reliable by-product of care.

show abstract

Do family physicians electronic health records support meaningful use?

Cited by 6 publications

References 7 publications

Assessment of the usability and impact of the Idaho Health Data Exchange (IHDE)

Assessment of the usability and impact of the Idaho Health Data Exchange (IHDE)

Transforming physician certification to support physician self-motivation and capacity to improve quality and safety

Clinical Quality Measure Exchange is Not Easy

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About