Saif Khairat1,2, Cameron Coleman1,3, Paige Ottmar4, Thomas Bice5, Ross Koppel6,7, Shannon S Carson5. 1. Carolina Health Informatics Program, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, USA. 2. School of Nursing, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, North Carolina, USA. 3. Preventive Medicine Residency Program, Department of Family Medicine, University of North Carolina School of Medicine, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, USA. 4. Gillings School of Global Public Health, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, USA. 5. Pulmonary Diseases and Critical Care Medicine, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, USA. 6. Sociology Department and Department of Biostatistics, Epidemiology, and Informatics, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA. 7. Department of Biomedical Informatics, University at Buffalo, Buffalo, New York, USA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Physician burnout associated with EHRs is a major concern in health care. A comprehensive assessment of differences among physicians in the areas of EHR performance, efficiency, and satisfaction has not been conducted. The study sought to study relationships among physicians' performance, efficiency, perceived workload, satisfaction, and usability in using the electronic health record (EHR) with comparisons by age, gender, professional role, and years of experience with the EHR. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Mixed-methods assessments of the medical intensivists' EHR use and perceptions. Using simulated cases, we employed standardized scales, performance measures, and extensive interviews. NASA Task Load Index (TLX), System Usability Scale (SUS), and Questionnaire on User Interface Satisfaction surveys were deployed. RESULTS: The study enrolled 25 intensive care unit (ICU) physicians (11 residents, 9 fellows, 5 attendings); 12 (48%) were men, with a mean age of 33 (range, 28-55) years and a mean of 4 (interquartile range, 2.0-5.5) years of Epic experience. Overall task performance scores were similar for men (90% ± 9.3%) and women (92% ± 4.4%), with no statistically significant differences (P = .374). However, female physicians demonstrated higher efficiency in completion time (difference = 7.1 minutes; P = .207) and mouse clicks (difference = 54; P = .13). Overall, men reported significantly higher perceived EHR workload stress compared with women (difference = 17.5; P < .001). Men reported significantly higher levels of frustration with the EHR compared with women (difference = 33.15; P < .001). Women reported significantly higher satisfaction with the ease of use of the EHR interface than men (difference = 0.66; P =.03). The women's perceived overall usability of the EHR is marginally higher than that of the men (difference = 10.31; P =.06). CONCLUSIONS: Among ICU physicians, we measured significant gender-based differences in perceived EHR workload stress, satisfaction, and usability-corresponding to objective patterns in EHR efficiency. Understanding the reasons for these differences may help reduce burnout and guide improvements to physician performance, efficiency, and satisfaction with EHR use. DESIGN: Mixed-methods assessments of the medical intensivists' EHR use and perceptions. Using simulated cases, we employed standardized scales, performance measures, and extensive interviews.
OBJECTIVE: Physician burnout associated with EHRs is a major concern in health care. A comprehensive assessment of differences among physicians in the areas of EHR performance, efficiency, and satisfaction has not been conducted. The study sought to study relationships among physicians' performance, efficiency, perceived workload, satisfaction, and usability in using the electronic health record (EHR) with comparisons by age, gender, professional role, and years of experience with the EHR. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Mixed-methods assessments of the medical intensivists' EHR use and perceptions. Using simulated cases, we employed standardized scales, performance measures, and extensive interviews. NASA Task Load Index (TLX), System Usability Scale (SUS), and Questionnaire on User Interface Satisfaction surveys were deployed. RESULTS: The study enrolled 25 intensive care unit (ICU) physicians (11 residents, 9 fellows, 5 attendings); 12 (48%) were men, with a mean age of 33 (range, 28-55) years and a mean of 4 (interquartile range, 2.0-5.5) years of Epic experience. Overall task performance scores were similar for men (90% ± 9.3%) and women (92% ± 4.4%), with no statistically significant differences (P = .374). However, female physicians demonstrated higher efficiency in completion time (difference = 7.1 minutes; P = .207) and mouse clicks (difference = 54; P = .13). Overall, men reported significantly higher perceived EHR workload stress compared with women (difference = 17.5; P < .001). Men reported significantly higher levels of frustration with the EHR compared with women (difference = 33.15; P < .001). Women reported significantly higher satisfaction with the ease of use of the EHR interface than men (difference = 0.66; P =.03). The women's perceived overall usability of the EHR is marginally higher than that of the men (difference = 10.31; P =.06). CONCLUSIONS: Among ICU physicians, we measured significant gender-based differences in perceived EHR workload stress, satisfaction, and usability-corresponding to objective patterns in EHR efficiency. Understanding the reasons for these differences may help reduce burnout and guide improvements to physician performance, efficiency, and satisfaction with EHR use. DESIGN: Mixed-methods assessments of the medical intensivists' EHR use and perceptions. Using simulated cases, we employed standardized scales, performance measures, and extensive interviews.
Authors: Adam Wright; Pamela M Neri; Skye Aaron; Thu-Trang T Hickman; Francine L Maloney; Daniel A Solomon; Dustin McEvoy; Angela Ai; Kevin Kron; Gianna Zuccotti Journal: J Am Med Inform Assoc Date: 2018-08-01 Impact factor: 4.497
Authors: Brian G Arndt; John W Beasley; Michelle D Watkinson; Jonathan L Temte; Wen-Jan Tuan; Christine A Sinsky; Valerie J Gilchrist Journal: Ann Fam Med Date: 2017-09 Impact factor: 5.166
Authors: Catherine Kim; Laura N McEwen; Robert B Gerzoff; David G Marrero; Carol M Mangione; Joseph V Selby; William H Herman Journal: Diabetes Care Date: 2005-07 Impact factor: 19.112
Authors: Blackford Middleton; Meryl Bloomrosen; Mark A Dente; Bill Hashmat; Ross Koppel; J Marc Overhage; Thomas H Payne; S Trent Rosenbloom; Charlotte Weaver; Jiajie Zhang Journal: J Am Med Inform Assoc Date: 2013-01-25 Impact factor: 4.497
Authors: Claire M Felmingham; Nikki R Adler; Zongyuan Ge; Rachael L Morton; Monika Janda; Victoria J Mar Journal: Am J Clin Dermatol Date: 2021-03 Impact factor: 7.403
Authors: Danny T Y Wu; Catherine Xu; Abraham Kim; Shwetha Bindhu; Kenneth E Mah; Mark H Eckman Journal: Appl Clin Inform Date: 2021-07-07 Impact factor: 2.762
Authors: Edward R Melnick; Elizabeth Harry; Christine A Sinsky; Liselotte N Dyrbye; Hanhan Wang; Mickey Todd Trockel; Colin P West; Tait Shanafelt Journal: J Med Internet Res Date: 2020-12-22 Impact factor: 5.428