Measuring Documentation Burden in Healthcare
- PMID: 39073484
- PMCID: PMC11534919
- DOI: 10.1007/s11606-024-08956-8
Measuring Documentation Burden in Healthcare
Abstract
Background: The enactment of the Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health Act and the wide adoption of electronic health record (EHR) systems have ushered in increasing documentation burden, frequently cited as a key factor affecting the work experience of healthcare professionals and a contributor to burnout. This systematic review aims to identify and characterize measures of documentation burden.
Methods: We integrated discussions with Key Informants and a comprehensive search of the literature, including MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, and gray literature published between 2010 and 2023. Data were narratively and thematically synthesized.
Results: We identified 135 articles about measuring documentation burden. We classified measures into 11 categories: overall time spent in EHR, activities related to clinical documentation, inbox management, time spent in clinical review, time spent in orders, work outside work/after hours, administrative tasks (billing and insurance related), fragmentation of workflow, measures of efficiency, EHR activity rate, and usability. The most common source of data for most measures was EHR usage logs. Direct tracking such as through time-motion analysis was fairly uncommon. Measures were developed and applied across various settings and populations, with physicians and nurses in the USA being the most frequently represented healthcare professionals. Evidence of validity of these measures was limited and incomplete. Data on the appropriateness of measures in terms of scalability, feasibility, or equity across various contexts were limited. The physician perspective was the most robustly captured and prominently focused on increased stress and burnout.
Discussion: Numerous measures for documentation burden are available and have been tested in a variety of settings and contexts. However, most are one-dimensional, do not capture various domains of this construct, and lack robust validity evidence. This report serves as a call to action highlighting an urgent need for measure development that represents diverse clinical contexts and support future interventions.
Keywords: burnout; documentation burden; electronic health record; healthcare professionals; satisfaction; systematic review.
© 2024. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Society of General Internal Medicine.
Conflict of interest statement
The authors declare that they do not have a conflict of interest.
References
-
- National Academies of Sciences E, Medicine, National Academy of M, Committee on Systems Approaches to Improve Patient Care by Supporting Clinician W-B. Taking Action Against Clinician Burnout: A Systems Approach to Professional Well-Being. National Academies Press; 2019. - PubMed
-
- The Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology. Strategy on Reducing Regulatory and Administrative Burden Relating to the Use of Health IT and EHRs. 2020. https://www.healthit.gov/sites/default/files/page/2020-02/BurdenReport_0.... Accessed 24 July 2024.
-
- Association AMI. AMIA 25x5: Reducing Documentation Burden. https://amia.org/about-amia/amia-25x5. Accessed 24 July 2024.
-
- Shanafelt TD, Dyrbye LN, Sinsky C, et al. Relationship Between Clerical Burden and Characteristics of the Electronic Environment With Physician Burnout and Professional Satisfaction. Journal Article. Mayo Clin Proc. 2016;91(7):836-48. 10.1016/j.mayocp.2016.05.007 - PubMed
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Miscellaneous