Meaningful Use and Quality of Care | Clinical Decision Support | JAMA Internal Medicine | JAMA Network
[Skip to Navigation]
Access to paid content on this site is currently suspended due to excessive activity being detected from your IP address Please contact the publisher to request reinstatement.
Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services.  The CMS EHR incentive programs: small-practice providers and clinical quality measures. Accessed on September 5, 2013.
Linder  JA, Ma  J, Bates  DW, Middleton  B, Stafford  RS.  Electronic health record use and the quality of ambulatory care in the United States.  Arch Intern Med. 2007;167(13):1400-1405.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
Zhou  L, Soran  CS, Jenter  CA,  et al.  The relationship between electronic health record use and quality of care over time.  J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2009;16(4):457-464.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
Keyhani  S, Hebert  PL, Ross  JS, Federman  A, Zhu  CW, Siu  AL.  Electronic health record components and the quality of care.  Med Care. 2008;46(12):1267-1272.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
Poon  EG, Wright  A, Simon  SR,  et al.  Relationship between use of electronic health record features and health care quality: results of a statewide survey.  Med Care. 2010;48(3):203-209.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
Research Letter
June 2014

Meaningful Use and Quality of Care

Author Affiliations
  • 1Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
  • 2Division of General Medicine and Primary Care, Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts
  • 3Harvard School of Public Health, Boston, Massachusetts
JAMA Intern Med. 2014;174(6):997-998. doi:10.1001/jamainternmed.2014.662

The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 included $30 billion for implementation of the Electronic Health Record (EHR) Meaningful Use (MU) incentive program with a goal of increasing EHR adoption and improving quality of care. Stage 1 of the EHR MU incentive program specified required core objectives, menu objectives, and clinical quality measures.1 We assessed if being a “meaningful user” (defined as meeting 15 core objectives, eg, computerized order entry, safe electronic prescribing, clinical decision support, and providing health information to patients, as well as meeting 5 of 10 optional menu objectives) was associated with improved quality on 7 measures for 5 chronic diseases. (See the eAppendix and eReferences in the Supplement.)