BACKGROUND: Medical students are increasingly documenting their patient notes in electronic health records (EHRs). Documentation short-cuts, such as copy-paste and templates, have raised concern among clinician-educators because they may perpetuate redundant, inaccurate, or even plagiarized notes. Little is known about medical students' experiences with copy-paste, templates and other "efficiency tools" in EHRs. PURPOSES: We sought to understand medical students' observations, practices, and attitudes regarding electronic documentation efficiency tools. METHODS: We surveyed 3rd-year medical students at one medical school. We asked about efficiency tools including copy-paste, templates, auto-inserted data, and "scribing" (documentation under a supervisor's name). RESULTS: Overall, 123 of 163 students (75%) responded; almost all frequently use an EHR for documentation. Eighty-six percent (102/119) reported at least sometimes observing residents copying data from other providers' notes and 60% (70/116) reported observing attending physicians doing so. Most students (95%, 113/119) reported copying from their own previous notes, and 22% (26/119) reported copying from residents. Only 10% (12/119) indicated that copying from other providers is acceptable, whereas 83% (98/118) believe copying from their own notes is acceptable. Most students use templates and auto-inserted data; 43% (51/120) reported documenting while signed in under an attending's name. Greater use of documentation efficiency tools is associated with plans to enter a procedural specialty and with lack of awareness of the medical school copy-paste policy. CONCLUSIONS: Students frequently use a range of efficiency tools to document in the electronic health record, most commonly copying their own notes. Although the vast majority of students believe it is unacceptable to copy-paste from other providers, most have observed clinical supervisors doing so.
BACKGROUND: Medical students are increasingly documenting their patient notes in electronic health records (EHRs). Documentation short-cuts, such as copy-paste and templates, have raised concern among clinician-educators because they may perpetuate redundant, inaccurate, or even plagiarized notes. Little is known about medical students' experiences with copy-paste, templates and other "efficiency tools" in EHRs. PURPOSES: We sought to understand medical students' observations, practices, and attitudes regarding electronic documentation efficiency tools. METHODS: We surveyed 3rd-year medical students at one medical school. We asked about efficiency tools including copy-paste, templates, auto-inserted data, and "scribing" (documentation under a supervisor's name). RESULTS: Overall, 123 of 163 students (75%) responded; almost all frequently use an EHR for documentation. Eighty-six percent (102/119) reported at least sometimes observing residents copying data from other providers' notes and 60% (70/116) reported observing attending physicians doing so. Most students (95%, 113/119) reported copying from their own previous notes, and 22% (26/119) reported copying from residents. Only 10% (12/119) indicated that copying from other providers is acceptable, whereas 83% (98/118) believe copying from their own notes is acceptable. Most students use templates and auto-inserted data; 43% (51/120) reported documenting while signed in under an attending's name. Greater use of documentation efficiency tools is associated with plans to enter a procedural specialty and with lack of awareness of the medical school copy-paste policy. CONCLUSIONS: Students frequently use a range of efficiency tools to document in the electronic health record, most commonly copying their own notes. Although the vast majority of students believe it is unacceptable to copy-paste from other providers, most have observed clinical supervisors doing so.
Authors: Ken Monahan; Cheng Ye; Edward Gould; Meng Xu; Shi Huang; Anderson Spickard; S Trent Rosenbloom; Joseph Coco; Daniel Fabbri; Bonnie Miller Journal: Appl Clin Inform Date: 2019-07-03 Impact factor: 2.342
Authors: Marianne Mak-van der Vossen; Walther van Mook; Stéphanie van der Burgt; Joyce Kors; Johannes C F Ket; Gerda Croiset; Rashmi Kusurkar Journal: BMC Med Educ Date: 2017-09-15 Impact factor: 2.463