Cargando…

Use of Electronic Health Record Access and Audit Logs to Identify Physician Actions Following Noninterruptive Alert Opening: Descriptive Study

BACKGROUND: Electronic health record (EHR) access and audit logs record behaviors of providers as they navigate the EHR. These data can be used to better understand provider responses to EHR–based clinical decision support (CDS), shedding light on whether and why CDS is effective. OBJECTIVE: This st...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Amroze, Azraa, Field, Terry S, Fouayzi, Hassan, Sundaresan, Devi, Burns, Laura, Garber, Lawrence, Sadasivam, Rajani S, Mazor, Kathleen M, Gurwitz, Jerry H, Cutrona, Sarah L
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: JMIR Publications 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6383113/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30730293
http://dx.doi.org/10.2196/12650
_version_ 1783396781064716288
author Amroze, Azraa
Field, Terry S
Fouayzi, Hassan
Sundaresan, Devi
Burns, Laura
Garber, Lawrence
Sadasivam, Rajani S
Mazor, Kathleen M
Gurwitz, Jerry H
Cutrona, Sarah L
author_facet Amroze, Azraa
Field, Terry S
Fouayzi, Hassan
Sundaresan, Devi
Burns, Laura
Garber, Lawrence
Sadasivam, Rajani S
Mazor, Kathleen M
Gurwitz, Jerry H
Cutrona, Sarah L
author_sort Amroze, Azraa
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Electronic health record (EHR) access and audit logs record behaviors of providers as they navigate the EHR. These data can be used to better understand provider responses to EHR–based clinical decision support (CDS), shedding light on whether and why CDS is effective. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to determine the feasibility of using EHR access and audit logs to track primary care physicians’ (PCPs’) opening of and response to noninterruptive alerts delivered to EHR InBaskets. METHODS: We conducted a descriptive study to assess the use of EHR log data to track provider behavior. We analyzed data recorded following opening of 799 noninterruptive alerts sent to 75 PCPs’ InBaskets through a prior randomized controlled trial. Three types of alerts highlighted new medication concerns for older patients’ posthospital discharge: information only (n=593), medication recommendations (n=37), and test recommendations (n=169). We sought log data to identify the person opening the alert and the timing and type of PCPs’ follow-up EHR actions (immediate vs by the end of the following day). We performed multivariate analyses examining associations between alert type, patient characteristics, provider characteristics, and contextual factors and likelihood of immediate or subsequent PCP action (general, medication-specific, or laboratory-specific actions). We describe challenges and strategies for log data use. RESULTS: We successfully identified the required data in EHR access and audit logs. More than three-quarters of alerts (78.5%, 627/799) were opened by the PCP to whom they were directed, allowing us to assess immediate PCP action; of these, 208 alerts were followed by immediate action. Expanding on our analyses to include alerts opened by staff or covering physicians, we found that an additional 330 of the 799 alerts demonstrated PCP action by the end of the following day. The remaining 261 alerts showed no PCP action. Compared to information-only alerts, the odds ratio (OR) of immediate action was 4.03 (95% CI 1.67-9.72) for medication-recommendation and 2.14 (95% CI 1.38-3.32) for test-recommendation alerts. Compared to information-only alerts, ORs of medication-specific action by end of the following day were significantly greater for medication recommendations (5.59; 95% CI 2.42-12.94) and test recommendations (1.71; 95% CI 1.09-2.68). We found a similar pattern for OR of laboratory-specific action. We encountered 2 main challenges: (1) Capturing a historical snapshot of EHR status (number of InBasket messages at time of alert delivery) required incorporation of data generated many months prior with longitudinal follow-up. (2) Accurately interpreting data elements required iterative work by a physician/data manager team taking action within the EHR and then examining audit logs to identify corresponding documentation. CONCLUSIONS: EHR log data could inform future efforts and provide valuable information during development and refinement of CDS interventions. To address challenges, use of these data should be planned before implementing an EHR–based study.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6383113
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher JMIR Publications
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-63831132019-03-15 Use of Electronic Health Record Access and Audit Logs to Identify Physician Actions Following Noninterruptive Alert Opening: Descriptive Study Amroze, Azraa Field, Terry S Fouayzi, Hassan Sundaresan, Devi Burns, Laura Garber, Lawrence Sadasivam, Rajani S Mazor, Kathleen M Gurwitz, Jerry H Cutrona, Sarah L JMIR Med Inform Original Paper BACKGROUND: Electronic health record (EHR) access and audit logs record behaviors of providers as they navigate the EHR. These data can be used to better understand provider responses to EHR–based clinical decision support (CDS), shedding light on whether and why CDS is effective. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to determine the feasibility of using EHR access and audit logs to track primary care physicians’ (PCPs’) opening of and response to noninterruptive alerts delivered to EHR InBaskets. METHODS: We conducted a descriptive study to assess the use of EHR log data to track provider behavior. We analyzed data recorded following opening of 799 noninterruptive alerts sent to 75 PCPs’ InBaskets through a prior randomized controlled trial. Three types of alerts highlighted new medication concerns for older patients’ posthospital discharge: information only (n=593), medication recommendations (n=37), and test recommendations (n=169). We sought log data to identify the person opening the alert and the timing and type of PCPs’ follow-up EHR actions (immediate vs by the end of the following day). We performed multivariate analyses examining associations between alert type, patient characteristics, provider characteristics, and contextual factors and likelihood of immediate or subsequent PCP action (general, medication-specific, or laboratory-specific actions). We describe challenges and strategies for log data use. RESULTS: We successfully identified the required data in EHR access and audit logs. More than three-quarters of alerts (78.5%, 627/799) were opened by the PCP to whom they were directed, allowing us to assess immediate PCP action; of these, 208 alerts were followed by immediate action. Expanding on our analyses to include alerts opened by staff or covering physicians, we found that an additional 330 of the 799 alerts demonstrated PCP action by the end of the following day. The remaining 261 alerts showed no PCP action. Compared to information-only alerts, the odds ratio (OR) of immediate action was 4.03 (95% CI 1.67-9.72) for medication-recommendation and 2.14 (95% CI 1.38-3.32) for test-recommendation alerts. Compared to information-only alerts, ORs of medication-specific action by end of the following day were significantly greater for medication recommendations (5.59; 95% CI 2.42-12.94) and test recommendations (1.71; 95% CI 1.09-2.68). We found a similar pattern for OR of laboratory-specific action. We encountered 2 main challenges: (1) Capturing a historical snapshot of EHR status (number of InBasket messages at time of alert delivery) required incorporation of data generated many months prior with longitudinal follow-up. (2) Accurately interpreting data elements required iterative work by a physician/data manager team taking action within the EHR and then examining audit logs to identify corresponding documentation. CONCLUSIONS: EHR log data could inform future efforts and provide valuable information during development and refinement of CDS interventions. To address challenges, use of these data should be planned before implementing an EHR–based study. JMIR Publications 2019-02-07 /pmc/articles/PMC6383113/ /pubmed/30730293 http://dx.doi.org/10.2196/12650 Text en ©Azraa Amroze, Terry S Field, Hassan Fouayzi, Devi Sundaresan, Laura Burns, Lawrence Garber, Rajani S Sadasivam, Kathleen M Mazor, Jerry H Gurwitz, Sarah L Cutrona. Originally published in JMIR Medical Informatics (http://medinform.jmir.org), 07.02.2019. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work, first published in JMIR Medical Informatics, is properly cited. The complete bibliographic information, a link to the original publication on http://medinform.jmir.org/, as well as this copyright and license information must be included.
spellingShingle Original Paper
Amroze, Azraa
Field, Terry S
Fouayzi, Hassan
Sundaresan, Devi
Burns, Laura
Garber, Lawrence
Sadasivam, Rajani S
Mazor, Kathleen M
Gurwitz, Jerry H
Cutrona, Sarah L
Use of Electronic Health Record Access and Audit Logs to Identify Physician Actions Following Noninterruptive Alert Opening: Descriptive Study
title Use of Electronic Health Record Access and Audit Logs to Identify Physician Actions Following Noninterruptive Alert Opening: Descriptive Study
title_full Use of Electronic Health Record Access and Audit Logs to Identify Physician Actions Following Noninterruptive Alert Opening: Descriptive Study
title_fullStr Use of Electronic Health Record Access and Audit Logs to Identify Physician Actions Following Noninterruptive Alert Opening: Descriptive Study
title_full_unstemmed Use of Electronic Health Record Access and Audit Logs to Identify Physician Actions Following Noninterruptive Alert Opening: Descriptive Study
title_short Use of Electronic Health Record Access and Audit Logs to Identify Physician Actions Following Noninterruptive Alert Opening: Descriptive Study
title_sort use of electronic health record access and audit logs to identify physician actions following noninterruptive alert opening: descriptive study
topic Original Paper
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6383113/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30730293
http://dx.doi.org/10.2196/12650
work_keys_str_mv AT amrozeazraa useofelectronichealthrecordaccessandauditlogstoidentifyphysicianactionsfollowingnoninterruptivealertopeningdescriptivestudy
AT fieldterrys useofelectronichealthrecordaccessandauditlogstoidentifyphysicianactionsfollowingnoninterruptivealertopeningdescriptivestudy
AT fouayzihassan useofelectronichealthrecordaccessandauditlogstoidentifyphysicianactionsfollowingnoninterruptivealertopeningdescriptivestudy
AT sundaresandevi useofelectronichealthrecordaccessandauditlogstoidentifyphysicianactionsfollowingnoninterruptivealertopeningdescriptivestudy
AT burnslaura useofelectronichealthrecordaccessandauditlogstoidentifyphysicianactionsfollowingnoninterruptivealertopeningdescriptivestudy
AT garberlawrence useofelectronichealthrecordaccessandauditlogstoidentifyphysicianactionsfollowingnoninterruptivealertopeningdescriptivestudy
AT sadasivamrajanis useofelectronichealthrecordaccessandauditlogstoidentifyphysicianactionsfollowingnoninterruptivealertopeningdescriptivestudy
AT mazorkathleenm useofelectronichealthrecordaccessandauditlogstoidentifyphysicianactionsfollowingnoninterruptivealertopeningdescriptivestudy
AT gurwitzjerryh useofelectronichealthrecordaccessandauditlogstoidentifyphysicianactionsfollowingnoninterruptivealertopeningdescriptivestudy
AT cutronasarahl useofelectronichealthrecordaccessandauditlogstoidentifyphysicianactionsfollowingnoninterruptivealertopeningdescriptivestudy