An Exploration of Barriers, Facilitators, and Suggestions for Improving Electronic Health Record Inbox-Related Usability: A Qualitative Analysis | Electronic Health Records | JAMA Network Open | 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 35.170.64.36. Please contact the publisher to request reinstatement.
1.
Shanafelt  TD, Boone  S, Tan  L,  et al.  Burnout and satisfaction with work-life balance among US physicians relative to the general US population.  Arch Intern Med. 2012;172(18):1377-1385. doi:10.1001/archinternmed.2012.3199PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
2.
Dewa  CS, Loong  D, Bonato  S, Thanh  NX, Jacobs  P.  How does burnout affect physician productivity: a systematic literature review.  BMC Health Serv Res. 2014;14:325. doi:10.1186/1472-6963-14-325PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
3.
Halbesleben  JRB, Rathert  C.  Linking physician burnout and patient outcomes: exploring the dyadic relationship between physicians and patients.  Health Care Manage Rev. 2008;33(1):29-39. doi:10.1097/01.HMR.0000304493.87898.72PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
4.
Anagnostopoulos  F, Liolios  E, Persefonis  G, Slater  J, Kafetsios  K, Niakas  D.  Physician burnout and patient satisfaction with consultation in primary health care settings: evidence of relationships from a one-with-many design.  J Clin Psychol Med Settings. 2012;19(4):401-410. doi:10.1007/s10880-011-9278-8PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
5.
Gregory  ME, Russo  E, Singh  H.  Electronic health record alert-related workload as a predictor of burnout in primary care providers.  Appl Clin Inform. 2017;8(3):686-697. doi:10.4338/ACI-2017-01-RA-0003PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
6.
Ratanawongsa  N, Roter  D, Beach  MC,  et al.  Physician burnout and patient-physician communication during primary care encounters.  J Gen Intern Med. 2008;23(10):1581-1588. doi:10.1007/s11606-008-0702-1PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
7.
Cutrona  SL, Fouayzi  H, Burns  L,  et al.  Primary care providers’ opening of time-sensitive alerts sent to commercial electronic health record InBaskets.  J Gen Intern Med. 2017;32(11):1210-1219. doi:10.1007/s11606-017-4146-3PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
8.
Dewa  CS, Loong  D, Bonato  S, Trojanowski  L, Rea  M.  The relationship between resident burnout and safety-related and acceptability-related quality of healthcare: a systematic literature review.  BMC Med Educ. 2017;17(1):195. doi:10.1186/s12909-017-1040-yPubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
9.
Edwards  ST, Helfrich  CD, Grembowski  D,  et al.  Task delegation and burnout trade-offs among primary care providers and nurses in Veterans Affairs Patient Aligned Care Teams (VA PACTs).  J Am Board Fam Med. 2018;31(1):83-93. doi:10.3122/jabfm.2018.01.170083PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
10.
Wallace  JE, Lemaire  JB, Ghali  WA.  Physician wellness: a missing quality indicator.  Lancet. 2009;374(9702):1714-1721. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(09)61424-0PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
11.
Pizziferri  L, Kittler  AF, Volk  LA,  et al.  Impact of an electronic health record on oncologists’ clinic time.  AMIA Annu Symp Proc. 2005;2005:1083-1083.PubMedGoogle Scholar
12.
Pizziferri  L, Kittler  AF, Volk  LA,  et al.  Primary care physician time utilization before and after implementation of an electronic health record: a time-motion study.  J Biomed Inform. 2005;38(3):176-188. doi:10.1016/j.jbi.2004.11.009PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
13.
Arndt  BG, Beasley  JW, Watkinson  MD,  et al.  Tethered to the EHR: primary care physician workload assessment using EHR event log data and time-motion observations.  Ann Fam Med. 2017;15(5):419-426. doi:10.1370/afm.2121PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
14.
Sinsky  C, Colligan  L, Li  L,  et al.  Allocation of physician time in ambulatory practice: a time and motion study in 4 specialties.  Ann Intern Med. 2016;165(11):753-760. doi:10.7326/M16-0961PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
15.
Murphy  DR, Meyer  AN, Russo  E, Sittig  DF, Wei  L, Singh  H.  The burden of inbox notifications in commercial electronic health records.  JAMA Intern Med. 2016;176(4):559-560. doi:10.1001/jamainternmed.2016.0209PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
16.
Murphy  DR, Reis  B, Sittig  DF, Singh  H.  Notifications received by primary care practitioners in electronic health records: a taxonomy and time analysis.  Am J Med. 2012;125(2):209.e1-209.e7. doi:10.1016/j.amjmed.2011.07.029PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
17.
Murphy  DR, Reis  B, Kadiyala  H,  et al.  Electronic health record-based messages to primary care providers: valuable information or just noise?  Arch Intern Med. 2012;172(3):283-285. doi:10.1001/archinternmed.2011.740PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
18.
Tai-Seale  M, Dillon  EC, Yang  Y,  et al.  Physicians’ well-being linked to in-basket messages generated by algorithms in electronic health records.  Health Aff (Millwood). 2019;38(7):1073-1078. doi:10.1377/hlthaff.2018.05509PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
19.
Mazur  LM, Mosaly  PR, Moore  C, Marks  L.  Association of the usability of electronic health records with cognitive workload and performance levels among physicians.  JAMA Netw Open. 2019;2(4):e191709. doi:10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2019.1709PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
20.
Khairat  S, Coleman  C, Newlin  T,  et al.  A mixed-methods evaluation framework for electronic health records usability studies.  J Biomed Inform. 2019;94:103175. doi:10.1016/j.jbi.2019.103175PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
21.
Middleton  B, Bloomrosen  M, Dente  MA,  et al; American Medical Informatics Association.  Enhancing patient safety and quality of care by improving the usability of electronic health record systems: recommendations from AMIA.  J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2013;20(e1):e2-e8. doi:10.1136/amiajnl-2012-001458PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
22.
Hysong  SJ, Sawhney  MK, Wilson  L,  et al.  Provider management strategies of abnormal test result alerts: a cognitive task analysis.  J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2010;17(1):71-77. doi:10.1197/jamia.M3200PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
23.
Hysong  SJ, Sawhney  MK, Wilson  L,  et al.  Understanding the management of electronic test result notifications in the outpatient setting.  BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2011;11(1):22. doi:10.1186/1472-6947-11-22PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
24.
Singh  H, Spitzmueller  C, Petersen  NJ, Sawhney  MK, Sittig  DF.  Information overload and missed test results in electronic health record-based settings.  JAMA Intern Med. 2013;173(8):702-704. doi:10.1001/2013.jamainternmed.61PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
25.
Endsley  MR.  Toward a theory of situation awareness in dynamic systems.  Hum Factors J Hum Factors Ergon Soc. 1995;37(1):32-64. doi:10.1518/001872095779049543Google ScholarCrossref
26.
Singh  H, Petersen  LA, Thomas  EJ.  Understanding diagnostic errors in medicine: a lesson from aviation.  Qual Saf Health Care. 2006;15(3):159-164. doi:10.1136/qshc.2005.016444PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
27.
Singh  H, Giardina  TD, Petersen  LA,  et al.  Exploring situational awareness in diagnostic errors in primary care.  BMJ Qual Saf. 2012;21(1):30-38. doi:10.1136/bmjqs-2011-000310PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
28.
Polson  PG, Lewis  C, Rieman  J, Wharton  C.  Cognitive walkthroughs: a method for theory-based evaluation of user interfaces.  Int J Man Mach Stud. 1992;36(5):741-773. doi:10.1016/0020-7373(92)90039-NGoogle ScholarCrossref
29.
Jacobsen  NE, John  BE.  Two case studies in using cognitive walkthrough for interface evaluation. https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/defd/98e1ae5db235822db9e50751c7db3084a6b0.pdf?_ga=2.66940840.74470440.1566337183-670941247.1556657767. Accessed August 20, 2019.
30.
Sittig  DF, Singh  H.  A new sociotechnical model for studying health information technology in complex adaptive healthcare systems.  Qual Saf Health Care. 2010;19(s3)(suppl 3):i68-i74. doi:10.1136/qshc.2010.042085PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
31.
Vaismoradi  M, Turunen  H, Bondas  T.  Content analysis and thematic analysis: implications for conducting a qualitative descriptive study.  Nurs Health Sci. 2013;15(3):398-405. doi:10.1111/nhs.12048PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
32.
Braun  V, Clarke  V.  Using thematic analysis in psychology.  Qual Res Psychol. 2006;3(2):77-101. doi:10.1191/1478088706qp063oaGoogle ScholarCrossref
33.
Collier  R.  Rethinking EHR interfaces to reduce click fatigue and physician burnout.  CMAJ. 2018;190(33):E994-E995. doi:10.1503/cmaj.109-5644PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
34.
Guo  U, Chen  L, Mehta  PH.  Electronic health record innovations: helping physicians—one less click at a time.  Health Inf Manag. 2017;46(3):140-144.PubMedGoogle Scholar
35.
Helfrich  CD, Simonetti  JA, Clinton  WL,  et al.  The Association of Team-specific workload and staffing with odds of burnout among VA primary care team members.  J Gen Intern Med. 2017;32(7):760-766. doi:10.1007/s11606-017-4011-4PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
36.
Murphy  DR, Satterly  T, Giardina  TD, Sittig  DF, Singh  H.  Practicing clinicians’ recommendations to reduce burden from the electronic health record inbox: a mixed-methods study.  J Gen Intern Med. 2019. doi:10.1007/s11606-019-05112-5PubMedGoogle Scholar
37.
Nielsen  J. Enhancing the explanatory power of usability heuristics. In:  CHI ‘94 Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. New York, NY: ACM Press; 1994:152-158.
Limit 200 characters
Limit 25 characters
Conflicts of Interest Disclosure

Identify all potential conflicts of interest that might be relevant to your comment.

Conflicts of interest comprise financial interests, activities, and relationships within the past 3 years including but not limited to employment, affiliation, grants or funding, consultancies, honoraria or payment, speaker's bureaus, stock ownership or options, expert testimony, royalties, donation of medical equipment, or patents planned, pending, or issued.

Err on the side of full disclosure.

If you have no conflicts of interest, check "No potential conflicts of interest" in the box below. The information will be posted with your response.

Not all submitted comments are published. Please see our commenting policy for details.

Limit 140 characters
Limit 3600 characters or approximately 600 words
    1 Comment for this article
    EHRs CAN be improved
    Frederick Rivara, MD, MPH | University of Washington
    We all know that the EHR is cited as the leading factor in physician burnout. This study shows that there are design changes that can be made to improve the usability of EHRs and make it more efficient for the users and reduce the stress of its use. It would seem to me that hospitals which are investing hundreds of millions in their EHR would want to help reduce burnout of their docs.
    CONFLICT OF INTEREST: Editor in Chief, JAMA Network Open
    Original Investigation
    Health Informatics
    October 4, 2019

    An Exploration of Barriers, Facilitators, and Suggestions for Improving Electronic Health Record Inbox-Related Usability: A Qualitative Analysis

    Author Affiliations
    • 1Center for Innovations in Quality, Effectiveness and Safety, Michael E. DeBakey Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Houston, Texas
    • 2Department of Medicine, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas
    • 3School of Biomedical Informatics, University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston, Houston
    • 4Center for Healthcare Quality and Safety, University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston, Houston
    JAMA Netw Open. 2019;2(10):e1912638. doi:10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2019.12638
    Key Points español 中文 (chinese)

    Question  What factors are associated with physicians’ situational awareness and efficiency of processing messages delivered via electronic health record (EHR) inboxes?

    Findings  This qualitative analysis included interviews with 25 physicians in 6 health care organizations and identified 60 barriers and 32 facilitators associated with EHR inbox designs and workflows and 28 unique suggestions for improvement. Physicians suggested EHR developers and health care organizations reduce message processing complexity, simplify interface design, provide features to reduce physician cognitive load, facilitate care team communication, and streamline inbox message content.

    Meaning  This study’s findings included multifaceted recommendations associated with improving EHR inbox usability and workflow to improve safety and efficiency and reduce physician burnout.

    Abstract

    Importance  Managing messages in the electronic health record (EHR) inbox consumes substantial amounts of physician time. Certain factors associated with inbox management, such as poor usability and excessive and unnecessary inbox messages, have been associated with physician burnout. Additionally, inbox design, usability, and workflows are associated with physicians’ situational awareness (ie, perception, comprehension, and projection of clinical status) and efficiency of processing EHR inbox messages. Understanding factors associated with inbox usability could improve future EHR inbox designs and workflows, thus reducing risk of burnout while improving patient safety.

    Objective  To determine barriers, facilitators, and suggestions associated with EHR inbox-related usability.

    Design, Setting, and Participants  This qualitative study included cognitive walkthroughs of EHR inbox management with 25 physicians (17 primary care physicians and 8 specialists) at 6 large health care organizations using 4 different EHR systems between May 6, 2015, and September 19, 2016. While processing EHR inbox messages, participants identified facilitators and barriers associated with EHR inbox situational awareness and processing efficiency and potential interventions to address such barriers. A qualitative analysis was performed on transcribed recordings using an inductive thematic approach with an 8-dimension sociotechnical model as a theoretical lens from May 6, 2015, to August 15, 2019.

    Results  The cognitive walkthroughs identified 60 barriers, 32 facilitators, and 28 suggestions for improving the EHR inbox. Emergent data fit within 5 major themes: message processing complexity, inbox interface design, cognitive load, team communication, and inbox message content. Within these themes, similar barriers were identified across sites, such as poor usability due the high numbers of clicks needed to accomplish actions. In certain instances, an identified facilitator at one site provided the exact solution needed to address a barrier identified at another site.

    Conclusions and Relevance  This qualitative study found that usability of the EHR inbox is often suboptimal and variable across sites, suggesting lack of shared best practices related to information management. Implementation of optimized design features and workflows will require EHR developers and health care organizations to collectively share this responsibility. Development of regional or national consortia to support collaborative sharing and implementation of EHR system best practices across EHR developers and health care organizations could also improve safety and efficiency and reduce physician burnout.

    ×