Exploring the relationship between electronic health records and provider burnout: A systematic review

Abstract

Objective Stress and burnout due to electronic health record (EHR) technology has become a focus for burnout intervention. The aim of this study is to systematically review the relationship between EHR use and provider burnout. Materials and Methods A systematic literature search was performed on PubMed, EMBASE, PsychInfo, ACM Digital Library in accordance with the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) statement. Inclusion criterion was original research investigating the association between EHR and provider burnout. Studies that did not measure the association objectively were excluded. Study quality was assessed using the Medical Education Research Study Quality Instrument. Qualitative synthesis was also performed. Results Twenty-six studies met inclusion criteria. The median sample size of providers was 810 (total 20 885; 44% male; mean age 53 [range, 34-56] years). Twenty-three (88%) studies were cross-sectional studies and 3 were single-arm cohort studies measuring pre- and postintervention burnout prevalence. Burnout was assessed objectively with various validated instruments. Insufficient time for documentation (odds ratio [OR], 1.40-5.83), high inbox or patient call message volumes (OR, 2.06-6.17), and negative perceptions of EHR by providers (OR, 2.17-2.44) were the 3 most cited EHR-related factors associated with higher rates of provider burnout that was assessed objectively. Conclusions The included studies were mostly observational studies; thus, we were not able to determine a causal relationship. Currently, there are few studies that objectively assessed the relationship between EHR use and provider burnout. The 3 most cited EHR factors associated with burnout were confirmed and should be the focus of efforts to improve EHR-related provider burnout.

How the nursing profession should adapt for a digital future

“…Nurses still commonly use practice systems that are lacking basic usability (eg, contributing to alert fatigue, reinforcing disruptive workflow processes) or generate added documentation burdens because of poor configuration and optimization. 54 There is huge variation globally in access to, integration of, and sustainability of digital technology. 55 -57 Solutions vary and are context specific.…”

“…Too often, technology to support nursing is poorly configured, resourced, or not upgraded to respond to practice and societal trends. Nurses still commonly use practice systems that are lacking basic usability (eg, contributing to alert fatigue, reinforcing disruptive workflow processes) or generate added documentation burdens because of poor configuration and optimization 54…”

A Mobile, Electronic Health Record-Connected Application for Managing Team Workflows in Inpatient Care

“…The result is a clunky and often frustrating experience for clinicians, associated with increasing time in the electronic chart, confusion, preventable errors, and clinician burnout. 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 Clinicians must cope with EHRs that are difficult to navigate and contain large amounts of duplicated, scattered, conflicting, and erroneous information. 15 Further, many EHRs are poorly matched to clinicians' operational models for care delivery.…”

“…Correct Answer: Option b is the correct answer. As we have learned in recent studies, 12 clinicians are spending more and more time in front of a computer to be able to complete the required work to care for patients. Time–motion studies have shown that clinicians are spending approximately 50% of their time in front of the EHR or on other tasks at a desk and approximately 27% on direct patient care.…”

Implementation of Clinical Assistants in a Pediatric Oncology Department: an Activity and Clinical Time Release Analysis

“…which accounts for a significant number of working hours of medical professionals [2]. In turn, this is one of the factors contributing to their low job satisfaction and burn out [3,4,5,6,7]. A study conducted in the context of the British National Health Service suggests that 20% of the work of general practitioners is devoted to administrative tasks [8].…”