Michael T Ou1, Hannah Kleiman2, Sachin Kalarn2, Ahmadreza Moradi3, Shweta Shukla2, Madalyn Danielson2, Mona Kaleem2, Michael Boland4, Alan L Robin4,5, Osamah J Saeedi2. 1. Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA. 2. Department of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA. 3. Department of Medicine, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY, USA. 4. Wilmer Eye Institute, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA. 5. Kellogg Institute, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To determine the amount of time ophthalmologists using Electronic Health Records (EHRs) spend looking at the patient and its correlation on patient satisfaction. METHODS: This prospective cohort study examined 67 patients seeking care at two different ophthalmology clinics. Videos of entire office visits were recorded and each video was graded for amount of time spent by physicians gazing at the patient, computer, paper medical records, or other areas. Videos were also graded for the amount of time examining the patient, and the physician speaking during each visit. A patient satisfaction survey was administered at the end of each office encounter. Time of physician gaze to the patient was correlated to satisfaction outcome measures. RESULTS: Ophthalmologists spent 28.0% ± 21.2% of the visit looking at the computer. Overall, patient satisfaction levels were very high (4.8 ± 0.5, 5-point Likert scale). Ophthalmologists spent the same amount of time looking at patients who were extremely satisfied (28.8% ± 16.7%) as those who were not extremely satisfied (28.8% ± 15.9%). CONCLUSIONS: Ophthalmologists on EHRs spend over a third of each patient visit looking at the computer. However, patient satisfaction levels are very high. The amount of time that the ophthalmologist gazes at the patient or the computer does not appear to have an effect on patient satisfaction in this particular study. Further research still needs to be performed regarding the effects of EHRs on the patient experience. Physicians should continue to be sensitive to their patients' needs and approach the use of EHRs in patient encounters on an individual basis.
PURPOSE: To determine the amount of time ophthalmologists using Electronic Health Records (EHRs) spend looking at the patient and its correlation on patient satisfaction. METHODS: This prospective cohort study examined 67 patients seeking care at two different ophthalmology clinics. Videos of entire office visits were recorded and each video was graded for amount of time spent by physicians gazing at the patient, computer, paper medical records, or other areas. Videos were also graded for the amount of time examining the patient, and the physician speaking during each visit. A patient satisfaction survey was administered at the end of each office encounter. Time of physician gaze to the patient was correlated to satisfaction outcome measures. RESULTS: Ophthalmologists spent 28.0% ± 21.2% of the visit looking at the computer. Overall, patient satisfaction levels were very high (4.8 ± 0.5, 5-point Likert scale). Ophthalmologists spent the same amount of time looking at patients who were extremely satisfied (28.8% ± 16.7%) as those who were not extremely satisfied (28.8% ± 15.9%). CONCLUSIONS: Ophthalmologists on EHRs spend over a third of each patient visit looking at the computer. However, patient satisfaction levels are very high. The amount of time that the ophthalmologist gazes at the patient or the computer does not appear to have an effect on patient satisfaction in this particular study. Further research still needs to be performed regarding the effects of EHRs on the patient experience. Physicians should continue to be sensitive to their patients' needs and approach the use of EHRs in patient encounters on an individual basis.
Entities:
Keywords:
Electronic health record; electronic medical record; ophthalmology; patient satisfaction; physician gaze
Authors: Wei Wei Lee; Maria A Alkureishi; Obioma Ukabiala; Laura Ruth Venable; Samantha S Ngooi; Daina D Staisiunas; Kristen E Wroblewski; Vineet M Arora Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2016-07-11 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: Richard Frankel; Andrea Altschuler; Sheba George; James Kinsman; Holly Jimison; Nan R Robertson; John Hsu Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2005-08 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: Michael F Chiang; Sarah Read-Brown; Daniel C Tu; Dongseok Choi; David S Sanders; Thomas S Hwang; Steven Bailey; Daniel J Karr; Elizabeth Cottle; John C Morrison; David J Wilson; Thomas R Yackel Journal: Trans Am Ophthalmol Soc Date: 2013-09