Prevalence of basic information technology use by U.S. physicians

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Information technology (IT) has been advocated as an important means to improve the practice of clinical medicine. OBJECTIVES: To determine current prevalence of non‐electronic health record (EHR) IT use by a national sample of U.S. physicians, and to identify associated physician, practice, and patient panel characteristics. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Survey conducted in early 2004 of 1,662 U.S. physicians engaged in direct patient care selected from 3 primary care specialties (family practice, internal medicine, pediatrics) and 3 nonprimary care specialties (anesthesiology, general surgery, cardiology). MEASUREMENTS: Self‐reported frequency of e‐mail communication with patients or other clinicians, online access to continuing medical education or professional journals, and use of any computerized decision support (CDS) during clinical care. Survey results were weighted by specialty and linked via practice zip codes to measures of area income and urbanization. RESULTS: Response rate was 52.5%. Respondents spent 49 (±19) (mean [±standard deviation]) hours per week in direct patient care and graduated from medical school 23 (±11) years earlier. “Frequent” use was highest for CDS (40.8%) and online professional journal access (39.0%), and lowest for e‐mail communication with patients (3.4%). Ten percent of physicians never used any of the 5 IT tools. In separate logistic regression analyses predicting usage of each of the 5 IT tools, the strongest associations with IT use were primary care practice (adjusted odds ratios [aORs] ranging from 1.34 to 2.26) and academic practice setting (aORs 2.17 to 5.41). Years since medical school graduation (aOR 0.85 to 0.87 for every 5 years after graduation) and solo/2‐person practice setting (aORs 0.21 to 0.55) were negatively associated with IT use. Practice location and patient panel characteristics were not independently associated with IT use. CONCLUSIONS: In early 2004, the majority of physicians did not regularly use basic, inexpensive, and widely available IT tools in clinical practice. Efforts to increase the use of IT in medicine should focus on practice‐level barriers to adoption.

Improving Colorectal Cancer Screening in Primary Care Practice: Innovative Strategies and Future Directions

“…Recent data show that less than one-quarter of primary care physicians use EHRs routinely or occasionally; less than half send patients computerized or manual reminder notices about preventive or follow-up care, and few e-mail patients routinely or occasionally. 34,37 Moreover, 1 systematic review concluded that additional research is needed to identify ways of using information technology to reduce demands on appointment face-to-face time in primary care. 38 For practices lacking EHRs, hand-held computers, 39 What is known.…”

Innovative strategies in critical care education

“…In addition to marked increases in the capacity to store information, improvements in technology have improved the way we share this information. Physicians more remote from medical school graduation are less likely to use technology compared with their more contemporary counterparts [6,7]. This may not seem surprising, but it does highlight a potential disconnect between a generation that is teaching and another that is learning.…”

The significance of attitudes towards evidence-based practice in information technology use in the health sector: an empirical investigation

“…For instance, the use of health information technology has been found to increase adherence to protocol-based care, enhances preventive healthcare delivery, facilitates clinical monitoring based on large-scale screening and aggregation of data (Chaudhry et al 2006). To date, however, progress in integrating CISs into the healthcare context has been slow (Cabanna et al 1999, Grant et al 2006. Although there is a consensus in the literature that healthcare professionals (especially doctors) differ from the general population of technology users with respect to technology acceptance still, CISs are not necessarily incorporated as an integral component in clinical practice; for CISs to be effective, healthcare professionals must be motivated to use these systems.…”