Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Randomized Controlled Trial
. 2021 Mar;36(3):580-584.
doi: 10.1007/s11606-020-06188-0. Epub 2020 Sep 8.

Effect of Outpatient Note Templates on Note Quality: NOTE (Notation Optimization through Template Engineering) Randomized Clinical Trial

Affiliations
Randomized Controlled Trial

Effect of Outpatient Note Templates on Note Quality: NOTE (Notation Optimization through Template Engineering) Randomized Clinical Trial

Jeremy A Epstein et al. J Gen Intern Med. 2021 Mar.

Abstract

Background: This is the first randomized controlled trial evaluating the impact of note template design on note quality using a simulated patient encounter and a validated assessment tool.

Objective: To compare note quality between two different templates using a novel randomized clinical simulation process.

Design: A randomized non-blinded controlled trial of a standard note template versus redesigned template.

Participants: PGY 1-3 IM residents.

Interventions: Residents documented the simulated patient encounter using one of two templates. The standard template was modeled after the usual outpatient progress note. The new template placed the assessment and plan section in the beginning, grouped subjective data into the assessment, and deemphasized less useful elements.

Main measures: Note length; time to note completion; note template evaluation by resident authors; note evaluation by faculty reviewers.

Key results: 36 residents participated, 19 randomized to standard template, 17 to new. New template generated shorter notes (103 vs 285 lines, p < 0.001) that took the same time to complete (19.8 vs 21.6 min, p = 0.654). Using a 5-point Likert scale, residents considered new notes to have increased visual appeal (4 vs 3, p = 0.05) and less redundancy and clutter (4 vs 3, p = 0.006). Overall template satisfaction was not statistically different. Faculty reviewers rated the standard note more up-to-date (4.3 vs 2.7, p = 0.001), accurate (3.9 vs 2.6, p = 0.003), and useful (4 vs 2.8, p = 0.002), but less organized (3.3 vs 4.5, p < 0.001). Total quality was not statistically different.

Conclusions: Residents rated the new note template more visually appealing, shorter, and less cluttered. Faculty reviewers rated both note types equivalent in the overall quality but rated new notes inferior in terms of accuracy and usefulness though better organized. This study demonstrates a novel method of a simulated clinical encounter to evaluate note templates before the introduction into practice.

Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT04333238.

Keywords: Clinical documentation; Note quality; Note template.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that they do not have a conflict of interest.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Research study workflow.

Comment in

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Hirschtick RE. A piece of my mind. Copy-and-paste. JAMA. 2006;295(20):2335–2336. doi: 10.1001/jama.295.20.2335. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Han H, Lopp L. Writing and reading in the electronic health record: an entirely new world. Med Educ Online. 2013;18:1–7. doi: 10.3402/meo.v18i0.18634. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Dean SM, Eickhoff JC, Bakel LA. The effectiveness of a bundled intervention to improve resident progress notes in an electronic health record. J Hosp Med. 2015;10(2):104–107. doi: 10.1002/jhm.2283. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Aylor M, Campbell EM, Winter C, Phillipi CA. Resident Notes in an Electronic Health Record A Mixed-Methods Study Using a Standardized Intervention With Qualitative Analysis. Clin Pediatr 2016:0009922816658651. - PubMed
    1. Lin C-T, McKenzie M, Pell J, Caplan L. Health care provider satisfaction with a new electronic progress note format: SOAP vs APSO format. JAMA Intern Med. 2013;173(2):160–162. doi: 10.1001/2013.jamainternmed.474. - DOI - PubMed

Publication types

Associated data

LinkOut - more resources