BACKGROUND: There is a paucity of data on the effectiveness of commercially available electronic systems for improving health care in office practices, where the majority of health care is delivered. In particular, the effect of electronic laboratory result viewing on quality of care, including preventive care, chronic disease management, and patient satisfaction, is unclear. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether electronic laboratory result viewing is associated with higher ambulatory care quality. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional study of primary care physicians (PCPs) in the Taconic IPA in New York, all of whom have the opportunity to use a free-standing electronic portal for laboratory result viewing. We analyzed 15 quality measures, reflecting preventive care, chronic disease management, and patient satisfaction, which were collected in 2005. Using generalized estimating equations, we determined associations between portal usage and quality, adjusting for adoption of electronic health records and 10 other physician characteristics, including case mix. MAIN RESULTS: One-third of physicians (54/168, 32%) used the portal at least once over a 6-month period. Use of the portal was associated with higher quality overall (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 1.25; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.003, 1.57). In stratified analyses, portal usage was associated with higher quality on those performance measures expected to be impacted by result viewing (adjusted OR 1.34; 95% CI 1.00, 1.81; p = 0.05), but not associated with quality for measures not expected to be impacted by result viewing (adjusted OR 1.03; 95% CI 0.72, 1.48; p = 0.85). CONCLUSION: Electronic laboratory result viewing was independently associated with higher ambulatory care quality. Longitudinal studies are needed to confirm this association.
BACKGROUND: There is a paucity of data on the effectiveness of commercially available electronic systems for improving health care in office practices, where the majority of health care is delivered. In particular, the effect of electronic laboratory result viewing on quality of care, including preventive care, chronic disease management, and patient satisfaction, is unclear. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether electronic laboratory result viewing is associated with higher ambulatory care quality. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional study of primary care physicians (PCPs) in the Taconic IPA in New York, all of whom have the opportunity to use a free-standing electronic portal for laboratory result viewing. We analyzed 15 quality measures, reflecting preventive care, chronic disease management, and patient satisfaction, which were collected in 2005. Using generalized estimating equations, we determined associations between portal usage and quality, adjusting for adoption of electronic health records and 10 other physician characteristics, including case mix. MAIN RESULTS: One-third of physicians (54/168, 32%) used the portal at least once over a 6-month period. Use of the portal was associated with higher quality overall (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 1.25; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.003, 1.57). In stratified analyses, portal usage was associated with higher quality on those performance measures expected to be impacted by result viewing (adjusted OR 1.34; 95% CI 1.00, 1.81; p = 0.05), but not associated with quality for measures not expected to be impacted by result viewing (adjusted OR 1.03; 95% CI 0.72, 1.48; p = 0.85). CONCLUSION: Electronic laboratory result viewing was independently associated with higher ambulatory care quality. Longitudinal studies are needed to confirm this association.
Authors: Elizabeth A McGlynn; Steven M Asch; John Adams; Joan Keesey; Jennifer Hicks; Alison DeCristofaro; Eve A Kerr Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2003-06-26 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Basit Chaudhry; Jerome Wang; Shinyi Wu; Margaret Maglione; Walter Mojica; Elizabeth Roth; Sally C Morton; Paul G Shekelle Journal: Ann Intern Med Date: 2006-04-11 Impact factor: 25.391
Authors: Ashish K Jha; Timothy G Ferris; Karen Donelan; Catherine DesRoches; Alexandra Shields; Sara Rosenbaum; David Blumenthal Journal: Health Aff (Millwood) Date: 2006-10-11 Impact factor: 6.301
Authors: Steven R Simon; Rainu Kaushal; Paul D Cleary; Chelsea A Jenter; Lynn A Volk; Eric G Poon; E John Orav; Helen G Lo; Deborah H Williams; David W Bates Journal: J Am Med Inform Assoc Date: 2006-10-26 Impact factor: 4.497
Authors: Jinan B Saaddine; Betsy Cadwell; Edward W Gregg; Michael M Engelgau; Frank Vinicor; Giuseppina Imperatore; K M Venkat Narayan Journal: Ann Intern Med Date: 2006-04-04 Impact factor: 25.391
Authors: S Trent Rosenbloom; Titus L Daniels; Thomas R Talbot; Taylor McClain; Robert Hennes; Shane Stenner; Sue Muse; Jim Jirjis; Gretchen Purcell Jackson Journal: J Am Med Inform Assoc Date: 2011-12-01 Impact factor: 4.497
Authors: Thomas D Sequist; David A Cook; Jennifer S Haas; Ronnie Horner; William M Tierney Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2008-04 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: Lisa M Kern; Jessica S Ancker; Erika Abramson; Vaishali Patel; Rina V Dhopeshwarkar; Rainu Kaushal Journal: J Am Med Inform Assoc Date: 2011-07-31 Impact factor: 4.497
Authors: Zachary M Grinspan; Erika L Abramson; Samprit Banerjee; Lisa M Kern; Rainu Kaushal; Jason S Shapiro Journal: AMIA Annu Symp Proc Date: 2013-11-16