PURPOSE: Recent efforts to encourage meaningful use of electronic health records (EHRs) assume that widespread adoption will improve the quality of ambulatory care, especially for complex clinical conditions such as diabetes. Cross-sectional studies of typical uses of commercially available ambulatory EHRs provide conflicting evidence for an association between EHR use and improved care, and effects of longer-term EHR use in community-based primary care settings on the quality of care are not well understood. METHODS: We analyzed data from 16 EHR-using and 26 non-EHR-using practices in 2 northeastern states participating in a group-randomized quality improvement trial. Measures of care were assessed for 798 patients with diabetes. We used hierarchical linear models to examine the relationship between EHR use and adherence to evidence-based diabetes care guidelines, and hierarchical logistic models to compare rates of improvement over 3 years. RESULTS: EHR use was not associated with better adherence to care guidelines or a more rapid improvement in adherence. In fact, patients in practices that did not use an EHR were more likely than those in practices that used an EHR to meet all of 3 intermediate outcomes targets for hemoglobin A(1c), low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, and blood pressure at the 2-year follow-up (odds ratio = 1.67; 95% CI, 1.12-2.51). Although the quality of care improved across all practices, rates of improvement did not differ between the 2 groups. CONCLUSIONS: Consistent use of an EHR over 3 years does not ensure successful use for improving the quality of diabetes care. Ongoing efforts to encourage adoption and meaningful use of EHRs in primary care should focus on ensuring that use succeeds in improving care. These efforts will need to include provision of assistance to longer-term EHR users.
RCT Entities:
PURPOSE: Recent efforts to encourage meaningful use of electronic health records (EHRs) assume that widespread adoption will improve the quality of ambulatory care, especially for complex clinical conditions such as diabetes. Cross-sectional studies of typical uses of commercially available ambulatory EHRs provide conflicting evidence for an association between EHR use and improved care, and effects of longer-term EHR use in community-based primary care settings on the quality of care are not well understood. METHODS: We analyzed data from 16 EHR-using and 26 non-EHR-using practices in 2 northeastern states participating in a group-randomized quality improvement trial. Measures of care were assessed for 798 patients with diabetes. We used hierarchical linear models to examine the relationship between EHR use and adherence to evidence-based diabetes care guidelines, and hierarchical logistic models to compare rates of improvement over 3 years. RESULTS: EHR use was not associated with better adherence to care guidelines or a more rapid improvement in adherence. In fact, patients in practices that did not use an EHR were more likely than those in practices that used an EHR to meet all of 3 intermediate outcomes targets for hemoglobin A(1c), low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, and blood pressure at the 2-year follow-up (odds ratio = 1.67; 95% CI, 1.12-2.51). Although the quality of care improved across all practices, rates of improvement did not differ between the 2 groups. CONCLUSIONS: Consistent use of an EHR over 3 years does not ensure successful use for improving the quality of diabetes care. Ongoing efforts to encourage adoption and meaningful use of EHRs in primary care should focus on ensuring that use succeeds in improving care. These efforts will need to include provision of assistance to longer-term EHR users.
Authors: Bijal A Balasubramanian; Sabrina M Chase; Paul A Nutting; Deborah J Cohen; Pamela A Ohman Strickland; Jesse C Crosson; William L Miller; Benjamin F Crabtree Journal: Ann Fam Med Date: 2010 Sep-Oct Impact factor: 5.166
Authors: Christine K Stroebel; Reuben R McDaniel; Benjamin F Crabtree; William L Miller; Paul A Nutting; Kurt C Stange Journal: Jt Comm J Qual Patient Saf Date: 2005-08
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: Paul A Nutting; Benjamin F Crabtree; William L Miller; Kurt C Stange; Elizabeth Stewart; Carlos Jaén Journal: Health Aff (Millwood) Date: 2011-03 Impact factor: 6.301
Authors: Patrick J O'Connor; Joann M Sperl-Hillen; William A Rush; Paul E Johnson; Gerald H Amundson; Stephen E Asche; Heidi L Ekstrom; Todd P Gilmer Journal: Ann Fam Med Date: 2011 Jan-Feb Impact factor: 5.166
Authors: James M Gill; Arch G Mainous; Richelle J Koopman; Marty S Player; Charles J Everett; Ying Xia Chen; James J Diamond; Michael I Lieberman Journal: Ann Fam Med Date: 2011 Jan-Feb Impact factor: 5.166
Authors: Mary Reed; Jie Huang; Richard Brand; Ilana Graetz; Romain Neugebauer; Bruce Fireman; Marc Jaffe; Dustin W Ballard; John Hsu Journal: JAMA Date: 2013-09-11 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Neil S Fleming; Edmund R Becker; Steven D Culler; Dunlei Cheng; Russell McCorkle; Briget da Graca; David J Ballard Journal: Health Serv Res Date: 2013-12-21 Impact factor: 3.402
Authors: Asia Friedman; Jesse C Crosson; Jenna Howard; Elizabeth C Clark; Maria Pellerano; Ben-Tzion Karsh; Benjamin Crabtree; Carlos Roberto Jaén; Deborah J Cohen Journal: J Am Med Inform Assoc Date: 2013-07-31 Impact factor: 4.497
Authors: Kaveh G Shojania; Alison Jennings; Alain Mayhew; Craig R Ramsay; Martin P Eccles; Jeremy Grimshaw Journal: Cochrane Database Syst Rev Date: 2009-07-08