Esther S Hing1, Catharine W Burt, David A Woodwell. 1. Division of Health Care Statistics, U.S. Department of Health & Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Health Statistics, Hyattsville, MD 20782, USA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: This report presents the latest information on the use of electronic medical records in physician offices. Percentages of medical practices and physicians within the practices using electronic medical records (EMR) are presented for 2006 by selected physician and practice characteristics. METHODS: Data from the physician induction interviews of the 2006 National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey (NAMCS) are presented. NAMCS includes a national probability sample of nonfederal office-based physicians who saw patients in an office setting. Sample data were weighted to produce national estimates of physicians. Estimates of medical practices were derived from NAMCS physician data by adjusting the weighting scheme using a multiplicity estimator. RESULTS: In 2006, 29.2 percent of office-based physicians reported using full or partial EMR systems, which represented a 22% increase since 2005 and a 60% increase since 2001, when the NAMCS began monitoring this technology. Starting in 2005, the NAMCS included questions about EMR system features that health information technology experts consider minimal for a comprehensive EMR, namely computerized orders for prescriptions, computerized orders for tests, reporting of test results (lab or imaging), and clinical notes. Based on these requirements, 12.4 percent of physicians surveyed used comprehensive EMR systems in 2006, a figure not significantly different from the 9.3 percent reported for 2005. From 2005 to 2006, the percentage of medical practices using full or partial EMR systems increased by 42% (from 18.3 to 25.9 percent), but the percentage of medical practices using a comprehensive EMR system did not change.
OBJECTIVES: This report presents the latest information on the use of electronic medical records in physician offices. Percentages of medical practices and physicians within the practices using electronic medical records (EMR) are presented for 2006 by selected physician and practice characteristics. METHODS: Data from the physician induction interviews of the 2006 National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey (NAMCS) are presented. NAMCS includes a national probability sample of nonfederal office-based physicians who saw patients in an office setting. Sample data were weighted to produce national estimates of physicians. Estimates of medical practices were derived from NAMCS physician data by adjusting the weighting scheme using a multiplicity estimator. RESULTS: In 2006, 29.2 percent of office-based physicians reported using full or partial EMR systems, which represented a 22% increase since 2005 and a 60% increase since 2001, when the NAMCS began monitoring this technology. Starting in 2005, the NAMCS included questions about EMR system features that health information technology experts consider minimal for a comprehensive EMR, namely computerized orders for prescriptions, computerized orders for tests, reporting of test results (lab or imaging), and clinical notes. Based on these requirements, 12.4 percent of physicians surveyed used comprehensive EMR systems in 2006, a figure not significantly different from the 9.3 percent reported for 2005. From 2005 to 2006, the percentage of medical practices using full or partial EMR systems increased by 42% (from 18.3 to 25.9 percent), but the percentage of medical practices using a comprehensive EMR system did not change.
Authors: Paul A Nutting; Benjamin F Crabtree; Elizabeth E Stewart; William L Miller; Raymond F Palmer; Kurt C Stange; Carlos Roberto Jaén Journal: Ann Fam Med Date: 2010 Impact factor: 5.166
Authors: Steven R Simon; Christine S Soran; Rainu Kaushal; Chelsea A Jenter; Lynn A Volk; Elisabeth Burdick; Paul D Cleary; E John Orav; Eric G Poon; David W Bates Journal: J Am Med Inform Assoc Date: 2009-04-23 Impact factor: 4.497
Authors: Susan Hart-Hester; Warren Jones; Valerie J M Watzlaf; Susan H Fenton; Carol Nielsen; Mary Madison; Chris Arthur; David Marbury; LeeAnn Rudman; Randi Patterson; Rebecca Reynolds; William Rudman Journal: Perspect Health Inf Manag Date: 2008-09-19
Authors: Emily Beth Devine; William Hollingworth; Ryan N Hansen; Nathan M Lawless; Jennifer L Wilson-Norton; Diane P Martin; David K Blough; Sean D Sullivan Journal: Health Serv Res Date: 2009-11-19 Impact factor: 3.402