MP02: The impact of adoption of an electronic health record on emergency physician work: a time motion study. (May 2020)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Calder-Sprackman, S.; Clapham, G.; Kandiah, T.; Choo-Foo, J.; Aggarwal, S.; Sweet, J.; Abdulkarim, K.; Price, C.; Thiruganasambandamoorthy, V.; Kwok, E.
• Is Part Of: CJEM. Volume 22(2020)Supplement 1
• Page Start: S42
• Page End: S43
• Publication Date: 2020-05
• Subjects: electronic health record, -- health informatics, -- time motion study; Emergency Treatment -- Periodicals; Emergency Medicine -- Periodicals; Emergency medical services -- Canada -- Periodicals; Medical emergencies -- Canada -- Periodicals; Emergency medical services; Medical emergencies; Canada; Periodicals; 616.02505
• DOI: 10.1017/cem.2020.150
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1481-8035

Abstract

Abstract : Introduction: Adoption of a new Electronic Health Record (EHR) can introduce radical changes in task allocation, work processes, and efficiency for providers. In June 2019, The Ottawa Hospital transitioned from a primarily paper based EHR to a comprehensive EHR (Epic) using a "big bang" approach. The objective of this study was to assess the impact of the transition to Epic on Emergency Physician (EP) work activities in a tertiary care academic Emergency Department (ED). Methods: We conducted a time motion study of EPs on shift in low acuity areas of our ED (CTAS 3-5). Fifteen EPs representing a spectrum of pre-Epic baseline workflow efficiencies were directly observed in real-time during two 4-hour sessions prior to EHR implementation (May 2019) and again in go live (August 2019). Trained observers performed continuous observation and measured times for the following EP tasks: chart review, direct patient care, documentation, physical movement, communication, teaching, handover, and other (including breaks). We compared time spent on tasks pre Epic and during go live and report mean times for the EP tasks per patient and per shift using two tailed t-test for comparison. Results: All physicians had a 17% decrease in patients seen after Epic implementation (2.72/hr vs 2.24/hr, p < 0.01). EPs spent the same amount of time per patient on direct patient care and chart review (direct patient care: 9min06sec/pt pre vs 8min56sec/pt go live, p = 0.77; chart review: 2min47sec/pt pre vs 2min50sec/pt go live, p = 0.88), however, documentation time increased (5min28sec/pt pre vs 7min12sec/pt go live, p < 0.01). Time spent on shift teaching learners increased but did not reach statistical significance (31min26sec/shift pre vs 36min21sec/shift go live, p = 0.39), and time spent on non-patient-specific activities – physical movement, handover, team communication, and other – did not change (50min49sec/shift pre vs 50min53sec/shift go live, p = 0.99). Conclusion: Implementation of Epic did not affect EP time with individual patients - there was no change in direct patient care or chart review. Documentation time increased and EP efficiency (patients seen per hr on shift) decreased after go live. Patient volumes cannot be adjusted in the ED therefore anticipating the EHR impact on EP workflow is critical for successful implementation. EDs may consider up staffing 20% during go live. Findings from this study can inform how to best support EDs nationally through transition to EHR.