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
. 2021 Apr 23;28(5):998-1008.
doi: 10.1093/jamia/ocaa325.

Measurement of clinical documentation burden among physicians and nurses using electronic health records: a scoping review

Affiliations

Measurement of clinical documentation burden among physicians and nurses using electronic health records: a scoping review

Amanda J Moy et al. J Am Med Inform Assoc. .

Abstract

Objective: Electronic health records (EHRs) are linked with documentation burden resulting in clinician burnout. While clear classifications and validated measures of burnout exist, documentation burden remains ill-defined and inconsistently measured. We aim to conduct a scoping review focused on identifying approaches to documentation burden measurement and their characteristics.

Materials and methods: Based on Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) Extension for Scoping Reviews (ScR) guidelines, we conducted a scoping review assessing MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, and CINAHL from inception to April 2020 for studies investigating documentation burden among physicians and nurses in ambulatory or inpatient settings. Two reviewers evaluated each potentially relevant study for inclusion/exclusion criteria.

Results: Of the 3482 articles retrieved, 35 studies met inclusion criteria. We identified 15 measurement characteristics, including 7 effort constructs: EHR usage and workload, clinical documentation/review, EHR work after hours and remotely, administrative tasks, cognitively cumbersome work, fragmentation of workflow, and patient interaction. We uncovered 4 time constructs: average time, proportion of time, timeliness of completion, activity rate, and 11 units of analysis. Only 45.0% of studies assessed the impact of EHRs on clinicians and/or patients and 40.0% mentioned clinician burnout.

Discussion: Standard and validated measures of documentation burden are lacking. While time and effort were the core concepts measured, there appears to be no consensus on the best approach nor degree of rigor to study documentation burden.

Conclusion: Further research is needed to reliably operationalize the concept of documentation burden, explore best practices for measurement, and standardize its use.

Keywords: burden; documentation; electronic health records; health policy; nurses; physicians; workflow.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1.
Figure 1.
PRISMA flow diagram for scoping review of eligible studies.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Hripcsak G, Bloomrosen M, FlatelyBrennan P, et al.Health data use, stewardship, and governance: ongoing gaps and challenges: a report from AMIA’s 2012 health policy meeting. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2014; 21 (2): 204–11. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Paterick ZR, Patel NJ, Paterick TE.. Unintended consequences of the electronic medical record on physicians in training and their mentors. Postgrad Med J 2018; 94 (1117): 659–61. - PubMed
    1. Coiera E, Ash J, Berg M.. The unintended consequences of health information technology revisited. Yearb Med Inform 2016; 25 (01): 163–9. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Palabindala V, Pamarthy A, Jonnalagadda NR.. Adoption of electronic health records and barriers. J Community Hosp Intern Med Perspect 2016; 6 (5): 32643. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Khairat S, Burke G, Archambault H, et al.Focus section on health IT usability: perceived burden of EHRs on physicians at different stages of their career. Appl Clin Inform 2018; 09 (02): 336–47. - PMC - PubMed

Publication types