Cargando…

Assessment of Variation in Electronic Health Record Capabilities and Reported Clinical Quality Performance in Ambulatory Care Clinics, 2014-2017

IMPORTANCE: Electronic health records (EHRs) are widely promoted to improve the quality of health care, but information about the association of multifunctional EHRs with broad measures of quality in ambulatory settings is scarce. OBJECTIVE: To assess the association between EHRs with different degr...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Shekelle, Paul G., Pane, Joseph D., Agniel, Denis, Shi, Yunfeng, Rumball-Smith, Juliet, Haas, Ann, Fischer, Shira, Rudin, Robert S., Totten, Mark, Lai, Julie, Scanlon, Dennis, Damberg, Cheryl L.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: American Medical Association 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8063064/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33885774
http://dx.doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2021.7476
_version_ 1783681888943079424
author Shekelle, Paul G.
Pane, Joseph D.
Agniel, Denis
Shi, Yunfeng
Rumball-Smith, Juliet
Haas, Ann
Fischer, Shira
Rudin, Robert S.
Totten, Mark
Lai, Julie
Scanlon, Dennis
Damberg, Cheryl L.
author_facet Shekelle, Paul G.
Pane, Joseph D.
Agniel, Denis
Shi, Yunfeng
Rumball-Smith, Juliet
Haas, Ann
Fischer, Shira
Rudin, Robert S.
Totten, Mark
Lai, Julie
Scanlon, Dennis
Damberg, Cheryl L.
author_sort Shekelle, Paul G.
collection PubMed
description IMPORTANCE: Electronic health records (EHRs) are widely promoted to improve the quality of health care, but information about the association of multifunctional EHRs with broad measures of quality in ambulatory settings is scarce. OBJECTIVE: To assess the association between EHRs with different degrees of capabilities and publicly reported ambulatory quality measures in at least 3 clinical domains of care. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This cross-sectional and longitudinal study was conducted using survey responses from 1141 ambulatory clinics in Minnesota, Washington, and Wisconsin affiliated with a health system that responded to the Healthcare Information and Management Systems Society Annual Survey and reported performance measures in 2014 to 2017. Statistical analysis was performed from July 10, 2019, through February 26, 2021. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: A composite measure of EHR capability that considered 50 EHR capabilities in 7 functional domains, grouped into the following ordered categories: no functional EHR, EHR underuser, EHR, neither underuser or superuser, EHR superuser; as well as a standardized composite of ambulatory clinical performance measures that included 3 to 25 individual measures (median, 13 individual measures). RESULTS: In 2014, 381 of 746 clinics (51%) were EHR superusers; this proportion increased in each subsequent year (457 of 846 clinics [54%] in 2015, 510 of 881 clinics [58%] in 2016, and 566 of 932 clinics [61%] in 2017). In each cross-sectional analysis year, EHR superusers had better clinical quality performance than other clinics (adjusted difference in score: 0.39 [95% CI, 0.12-0.65] in 2014; 0.29 [95% CI, −0.01 to 0.59] in 2015; 0.26 [95% CI, –0.05 to 0.56] in 2016; and 0.20 [95% CI, –0.04 to 0.45] in 2017). This difference in scores translates into an approximately 9% difference in a clinic’s rank order in clinical quality. In longitudinal analyses, clinics that progressed to EHR superuser status had only slightly better gains in clinical quality between 2014 and 2017 compared with the gains in clinical quality of clinics that were static in terms of their EHR status (0.10 [95% CI, −0.13 to 0.32]). In an exploratory analysis, different types of EHR capability progressions had different degrees of associated improvements in ambulatory clinical quality (eg, progression from no functional EHR to a status short of superuser, 0.06 [95% CI, −0.40 to 0.52]; progression from EHR underuser to EHR superuser, 0.18 [95% CI, −0.14 to 0.50]). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Between 2014 and 2017, ambulatory clinics in Minnesota, Washington, and Wisconsin with EHRs having greater capabilities had better composite measures of clinical quality than other clinics, but clinics that gained EHR capabilities during this time had smaller increases in clinical quality that were not statistically significant.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8063064
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher American Medical Association
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-80630642021-05-06 Assessment of Variation in Electronic Health Record Capabilities and Reported Clinical Quality Performance in Ambulatory Care Clinics, 2014-2017 Shekelle, Paul G. Pane, Joseph D. Agniel, Denis Shi, Yunfeng Rumball-Smith, Juliet Haas, Ann Fischer, Shira Rudin, Robert S. Totten, Mark Lai, Julie Scanlon, Dennis Damberg, Cheryl L. JAMA Netw Open Original Investigation IMPORTANCE: Electronic health records (EHRs) are widely promoted to improve the quality of health care, but information about the association of multifunctional EHRs with broad measures of quality in ambulatory settings is scarce. OBJECTIVE: To assess the association between EHRs with different degrees of capabilities and publicly reported ambulatory quality measures in at least 3 clinical domains of care. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This cross-sectional and longitudinal study was conducted using survey responses from 1141 ambulatory clinics in Minnesota, Washington, and Wisconsin affiliated with a health system that responded to the Healthcare Information and Management Systems Society Annual Survey and reported performance measures in 2014 to 2017. Statistical analysis was performed from July 10, 2019, through February 26, 2021. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: A composite measure of EHR capability that considered 50 EHR capabilities in 7 functional domains, grouped into the following ordered categories: no functional EHR, EHR underuser, EHR, neither underuser or superuser, EHR superuser; as well as a standardized composite of ambulatory clinical performance measures that included 3 to 25 individual measures (median, 13 individual measures). RESULTS: In 2014, 381 of 746 clinics (51%) were EHR superusers; this proportion increased in each subsequent year (457 of 846 clinics [54%] in 2015, 510 of 881 clinics [58%] in 2016, and 566 of 932 clinics [61%] in 2017). In each cross-sectional analysis year, EHR superusers had better clinical quality performance than other clinics (adjusted difference in score: 0.39 [95% CI, 0.12-0.65] in 2014; 0.29 [95% CI, −0.01 to 0.59] in 2015; 0.26 [95% CI, –0.05 to 0.56] in 2016; and 0.20 [95% CI, –0.04 to 0.45] in 2017). This difference in scores translates into an approximately 9% difference in a clinic’s rank order in clinical quality. In longitudinal analyses, clinics that progressed to EHR superuser status had only slightly better gains in clinical quality between 2014 and 2017 compared with the gains in clinical quality of clinics that were static in terms of their EHR status (0.10 [95% CI, −0.13 to 0.32]). In an exploratory analysis, different types of EHR capability progressions had different degrees of associated improvements in ambulatory clinical quality (eg, progression from no functional EHR to a status short of superuser, 0.06 [95% CI, −0.40 to 0.52]; progression from EHR underuser to EHR superuser, 0.18 [95% CI, −0.14 to 0.50]). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Between 2014 and 2017, ambulatory clinics in Minnesota, Washington, and Wisconsin with EHRs having greater capabilities had better composite measures of clinical quality than other clinics, but clinics that gained EHR capabilities during this time had smaller increases in clinical quality that were not statistically significant. American Medical Association 2021-04-22 /pmc/articles/PMC8063064/ /pubmed/33885774 http://dx.doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2021.7476 Text en Copyright 2021 Shekelle PG et al. JAMA Network Open. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the CC-BY License.
spellingShingle Original Investigation
Shekelle, Paul G.
Pane, Joseph D.
Agniel, Denis
Shi, Yunfeng
Rumball-Smith, Juliet
Haas, Ann
Fischer, Shira
Rudin, Robert S.
Totten, Mark
Lai, Julie
Scanlon, Dennis
Damberg, Cheryl L.
Assessment of Variation in Electronic Health Record Capabilities and Reported Clinical Quality Performance in Ambulatory Care Clinics, 2014-2017
title Assessment of Variation in Electronic Health Record Capabilities and Reported Clinical Quality Performance in Ambulatory Care Clinics, 2014-2017
title_full Assessment of Variation in Electronic Health Record Capabilities and Reported Clinical Quality Performance in Ambulatory Care Clinics, 2014-2017
title_fullStr Assessment of Variation in Electronic Health Record Capabilities and Reported Clinical Quality Performance in Ambulatory Care Clinics, 2014-2017
title_full_unstemmed Assessment of Variation in Electronic Health Record Capabilities and Reported Clinical Quality Performance in Ambulatory Care Clinics, 2014-2017
title_short Assessment of Variation in Electronic Health Record Capabilities and Reported Clinical Quality Performance in Ambulatory Care Clinics, 2014-2017
title_sort assessment of variation in electronic health record capabilities and reported clinical quality performance in ambulatory care clinics, 2014-2017
topic Original Investigation
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8063064/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33885774
http://dx.doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2021.7476
work_keys_str_mv AT shekellepaulg assessmentofvariationinelectronichealthrecordcapabilitiesandreportedclinicalqualityperformanceinambulatorycareclinics20142017
AT panejosephd assessmentofvariationinelectronichealthrecordcapabilitiesandreportedclinicalqualityperformanceinambulatorycareclinics20142017
AT agnieldenis assessmentofvariationinelectronichealthrecordcapabilitiesandreportedclinicalqualityperformanceinambulatorycareclinics20142017
AT shiyunfeng assessmentofvariationinelectronichealthrecordcapabilitiesandreportedclinicalqualityperformanceinambulatorycareclinics20142017
AT rumballsmithjuliet assessmentofvariationinelectronichealthrecordcapabilitiesandreportedclinicalqualityperformanceinambulatorycareclinics20142017
AT haasann assessmentofvariationinelectronichealthrecordcapabilitiesandreportedclinicalqualityperformanceinambulatorycareclinics20142017
AT fischershira assessmentofvariationinelectronichealthrecordcapabilitiesandreportedclinicalqualityperformanceinambulatorycareclinics20142017
AT rudinroberts assessmentofvariationinelectronichealthrecordcapabilitiesandreportedclinicalqualityperformanceinambulatorycareclinics20142017
AT tottenmark assessmentofvariationinelectronichealthrecordcapabilitiesandreportedclinicalqualityperformanceinambulatorycareclinics20142017
AT laijulie assessmentofvariationinelectronichealthrecordcapabilitiesandreportedclinicalqualityperformanceinambulatorycareclinics20142017
AT scanlondennis assessmentofvariationinelectronichealthrecordcapabilitiesandreportedclinicalqualityperformanceinambulatorycareclinics20142017
AT dambergcheryll assessmentofvariationinelectronichealthrecordcapabilitiesandreportedclinicalqualityperformanceinambulatorycareclinics20142017