Relationships Among Physician Vendor-Derived Proficiency Score, Gender, and Time in the Electronic Health Record.

IF 1.8 4区 医学 Q2 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL
Family Medicine Pub Date : 2025-01-01 Epub Date: 2024-11-12 DOI:10.22454/FamMed.2024.678473
Katherine L Liang, Ellen J Gelles, Yasir Tarabichi
{"title":"Relationships Among Physician Vendor-Derived Proficiency Score, Gender, and Time in the Electronic Health Record.","authors":"Katherine L Liang, Ellen J Gelles, Yasir Tarabichi","doi":"10.22454/FamMed.2024.678473","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background and objectives: </strong>Electronic health record (EHR) customization is proposed to mitigate EHR-related burnout. Gender disparities in EHR usage are established, though less is known regarding differences in customization and its impact on EHR time. This study examined gender differences in vendor-derived proficiency score (PS) and its relationship to EHR time.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This was a retrospective observational study of ambulatory EHR use for adult primary care and medical subspecialty physicians at an academic safety-net health care system. The EHR vendor provided a physician PS (0-10), derived from customization and efficiency tool utilization. Primary outcomes were PS, time in system per day, and time in system per appointment stratified by gender. We used multiple variable linear regression to determine whether gender differences persisted with the inclusion of other factors.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 228 physicians were included in the study; 122 were women, and 106 were men. Women had higher median PS (7.6 vs 6.6, P=.021) and EHR time per day (150.5 vs 119.9 minutes, P=.013), but no difference in time per appointment (24.7 vs 26.1 minutes, P=.665). After adjusting for potential confounders, gender remained a significant predictor of PS, but not time in EHR. Higher PS was significantly associated with greater time in the system per appointment, but not per day.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>While women had higher PS than men, gender was not significantly associated with measures of EHR time after adjusting for potential confounders. Higher PS was associated with greater time in the EHR per appointment, suggesting factors that influence EHR time are complex and varied.</p>","PeriodicalId":50456,"journal":{"name":"Family Medicine","volume":" ","pages":"28-34"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11745515/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Family Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.22454/FamMed.2024.678473","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/11/12 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background and objectives: Electronic health record (EHR) customization is proposed to mitigate EHR-related burnout. Gender disparities in EHR usage are established, though less is known regarding differences in customization and its impact on EHR time. This study examined gender differences in vendor-derived proficiency score (PS) and its relationship to EHR time.

Methods: This was a retrospective observational study of ambulatory EHR use for adult primary care and medical subspecialty physicians at an academic safety-net health care system. The EHR vendor provided a physician PS (0-10), derived from customization and efficiency tool utilization. Primary outcomes were PS, time in system per day, and time in system per appointment stratified by gender. We used multiple variable linear regression to determine whether gender differences persisted with the inclusion of other factors.

Results: A total of 228 physicians were included in the study; 122 were women, and 106 were men. Women had higher median PS (7.6 vs 6.6, P=.021) and EHR time per day (150.5 vs 119.9 minutes, P=.013), but no difference in time per appointment (24.7 vs 26.1 minutes, P=.665). After adjusting for potential confounders, gender remained a significant predictor of PS, but not time in EHR. Higher PS was significantly associated with greater time in the system per appointment, but not per day.

Conclusions: While women had higher PS than men, gender was not significantly associated with measures of EHR time after adjusting for potential confounders. Higher PS was associated with greater time in the EHR per appointment, suggesting factors that influence EHR time are complex and varied.

电子健康记录中医生供应商衍生的熟练程度评分、性别和时间之间的关系。
背景和目的:提出电子健康记录(EHR)定制以减轻EHR相关的职业倦怠。电子病历使用中的性别差异是确定的,尽管对定制差异及其对电子病历时间的影响知之甚少。本研究考察了供应商衍生熟练程度分数(PS)的性别差异及其与电子病历时间的关系。方法:这是一项回顾性观察研究,在学术安全网卫生保健系统中,成人初级保健和医疗亚专科医生使用门诊电子病历。EHR供应商提供了一个医生PS(0-10),来自定制和效率工具的使用。主要结局是PS、每天在系统中的时间、按性别分层的每次预约在系统中的时间。我们使用多元线性回归来确定性别差异是否在包含其他因素后仍然存在。结果:共有228名医生被纳入研究;122名女性,106名男性。女性的平均寿命(7.6 vs 6.6, P= 0.021)和每天电子病历时间(150.5 vs 119.9分钟,P= 0.013)较高,但每次预约时间没有差异(24.7 vs 26.1分钟,P= 0.665)。在调整了潜在的混杂因素后,性别仍然是电子病历中PS的显著预测因子,而不是时间。PS越高,每次预约在系统中停留的时间越长,而不是每天。结论:虽然女性的PS高于男性,但在调整潜在混杂因素后,性别与电子病历时间的测量没有显著相关。PS越高,每次预约的电子病历时间越长,这表明影响电子病历时间的因素是复杂而多样的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Family Medicine
Family Medicine 医学-医学:内科
CiteScore
2.40
自引率
21.10%
发文量
0
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Family Medicine, the official journal of the Society of Teachers of Family Medicine, publishes original research, systematic reviews, narrative essays, and policy analyses relevant to the discipline of family medicine, particularly focusing on primary care medical education, health workforce policy, and health services research. Journal content is not limited to educational research from family medicine educators; and we welcome innovative, high-quality contributions from authors in a variety of specialties and academic fields.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信