Mitesh S Patel1,2,3,4,5, Kevin G Volpp6,7,8,9,10, Dylan S Small7, Craig Wynne6, Jingsan Zhu6,9, Lin Yang6, Steven Honeywell6, Susan C Day6. 1. Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. mpatel@upenn.edu. 2. The Wharton School, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. mpatel@upenn.edu. 3. Crescenz Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Philadelphia, PA, USA. mpatel@upenn.edu. 4. Center for Health Incentives and Behavioral Economics, Leonard Davis Institute of Health Economics, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. mpatel@upenn.edu. 5. Penn Medicine Center for Health Care Innovation, University of Pennsylvania Health System, Philadelphia, PA, USA. mpatel@upenn.edu. 6. Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. 7. The Wharton School, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. 8. Crescenz Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Philadelphia, PA, USA. 9. Center for Health Incentives and Behavioral Economics, Leonard Davis Institute of Health Economics, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. 10. Penn Medicine Center for Health Care Innovation, University of Pennsylvania Health System, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Despite the benefits of influenza vaccination, each year more than half of adults in the United States do not receive it. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the association between an active choice intervention in the electronic health record (EHR) and changes in influenza vaccination rates. DESIGN: Observational study. PATIENTS: Adults eligible for influenza vaccination with a clinic visit at one of three internal medicine practices at the University of Pennsylvania Health System between September 2010 and March 2013. INTERVENTION: The EHR confirmed patient eligibility during the clinic visit and, upon accessing the patient chart, prompted the physician and their medical assistant to actively choose to "accept" or "cancel" an order for the influenza vaccine. MAIN MEASURES: Change in influenza vaccination order rates at the intervention practice compared to two control practices for the 2012-2013 flu season, comparing trends during the prior two flu seasons adjusting for time trends and patient and clinic visit characteristics. KEY RESULTS: The sample (n = 45,926 patients) was 62.9% female, 35.9% white, and 54.4% black, with a mean age of 50.2 years. Trends were similar between practices during the 2 years in the pre-intervention period. Vaccination rates increased in both groups in the post-intervention year, but the intervention practice using active choice had a significantly greater increase than the control (adjusted difference-in-difference: 6.6 percentage points; 95% CI, 5.1-8.1; P < 0.001), representing a 37.3% relative increase compared to the pre-intervention period. More than 99.9% (9938/9941) of orders placed during the study period resulted in vaccination. CONCLUSIONS: Active choice through the EHR was associated with a significant increase in influenza vaccination rates.
BACKGROUND: Despite the benefits of influenza vaccination, each year more than half of adults in the United States do not receive it. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the association between an active choice intervention in the electronic health record (EHR) and changes in influenza vaccination rates. DESIGN: Observational study. PATIENTS: Adults eligible for influenza vaccination with a clinic visit at one of three internal medicine practices at the University of Pennsylvania Health System between September 2010 and March 2013. INTERVENTION: The EHR confirmed patient eligibility during the clinic visit and, upon accessing the patient chart, prompted the physician and their medical assistant to actively choose to "accept" or "cancel" an order for the influenza vaccine. MAIN MEASURES: Change in influenza vaccination order rates at the intervention practice compared to two control practices for the 2012-2013 flu season, comparing trends during the prior two flu seasons adjusting for time trends and patient and clinic visit characteristics. KEY RESULTS: The sample (n = 45,926 patients) was 62.9% female, 35.9% white, and 54.4% black, with a mean age of 50.2 years. Trends were similar between practices during the 2 years in the pre-intervention period. Vaccination rates increased in both groups in the post-intervention year, but the intervention practice using active choice had a significantly greater increase than the control (adjusted difference-in-difference: 6.6 percentage points; 95% CI, 5.1-8.1; P < 0.001), representing a 37.3% relative increase compared to the pre-intervention period. More than 99.9% (9938/9941) of orders placed during the study period resulted in vaccination. CONCLUSIONS: Active choice through the EHR was associated with a significant increase in influenza vaccination rates.
Entities:
Keywords:
active choice; behavioral economics; choice architecture; electronic health record; influenza vaccination; nudge; physician behavior
Authors: Anthony J Avery; Boki S P Savelyich; Aziz Sheikh; Judy Cantrill; Caroline J Morris; Bernard Fernando; Mike Bainbridge; Pete Horsfield; Sheila Teasdale Journal: Inform Prim Care Date: 2005
Authors: Shobha Phansalkar; Heleen van der Sijs; Alisha D Tucker; Amrita A Desai; Douglas S Bell; Jonathan M Teich; Blackford Middleton; David W Bates Journal: J Am Med Inform Assoc Date: 2012-09-25 Impact factor: 4.497
Authors: Alexander G Fiks; Kenya F Hunter; A Russell Localio; Robert W Grundmeier; Tyra Bryant-Stephens; Anthony A Luberti; Louis M Bell; Evaline A Alessandrini Journal: Pediatrics Date: 2009-07 Impact factor: 7.124
Authors: Mitesh S Patel; Susan Day; Dylan S Small; John T Howell; Gillian L Lautenbach; Eliot H Nierman; Kevin G Volpp Journal: Ann Intern Med Date: 2014-11-18 Impact factor: 25.391
Authors: C B Bridges; W W Thompson; M I Meltzer; G R Reeve; W J Talamonti; N J Cox; H A Lilac; H Hall; A Klimov; K Fukuda Journal: JAMA Date: 2000-10-04 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: William W Thompson; David K Shay; Eric Weintraub; Lynnette Brammer; Carolyn B Bridges; Nancy J Cox; Keiji Fukuda Journal: JAMA Date: 2004-09-15 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Christopher R Manz; Ravi B Parikh; Chalanda N Evans; Corey Chivers; Susan H Regli; Justin E Bekelman; Dylan Small; Charles A L Rareshide; Nina O'Connor; Lynn M Schuchter; Lawrence N Shulman; Mitesh S Patel Journal: Contemp Clin Trials Date: 2020-01-23 Impact factor: 2.226
Authors: Ashley B Stephens; Chelsea S Wynn; Annika M Hofstetter; Chelsea Kolff; Oscar Pena; Eric Kahn; Balendu Dasgupta; Karthik Natarajan; David K Vawdrey; Mariellen M Lane; Laura Robbins-Milne; Rajasekhar Ramakrishnan; Stephen Holleran; Melissa S Stockwell Journal: Appl Clin Inform Date: 2021-12-15 Impact factor: 2.342
Authors: Lisa McIlmurray; Bronagh Blackwood; Martin Dempster; Frank Kee; Charles Gillan; Rachael Hagan; Lynne Lohfeld; Murali Shyamsundar Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2022-07-12 Impact factor: 3.006
Authors: Hayley M Belli; Sara K Chokshi; Roshini Hegde; Andrea B Troxel; Saul Blecker; Paul A Testa; Judd Anderman; Christina Wong; Devin M Mann Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2020-09-03 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: Katherine R Courtright; Erich M Dress; Jaspal Singh; Brian A Bayes; Marzana Chowdhury; Dylan S Small; Timothy Hetherington; Lindsay Plickert; Michael E Detsky; Jason N Doctor; Michael O Harhay; Henry L Burke; Michael B Green; Toan Huynh; D Matthew Sullivan; Scott D Halpern Journal: Ann Am Thorac Soc Date: 2021-02