Abstract
Purpose
The use of electronic health records (EHRs) by physicians during the consultation is common and can be problematic. Factors influencing the use of EHRs during clinical encounters include physician and patient characteristics, consultation type as well as spatial organization of the room and type of EHR template. Their relative importance is however not well known. This study aimed to explore to what extent several physician, patient and consultation factors were associated with EHR use during the first 10 minutes of primary care consultations.
Methods
We examined EHR use of 17 residents in 142 videotaped consultations at the Primary Care Division of the Geneva University Hospitals, Switzerland. We conducted univariable and multivariable analyses with patient, physician and consultation variables to predict EHR use: sex and age of the patient; physician’s sex, age, postgraduate experience and EHR-use self-perception; and language, type of consultation (new/follow-up) and content of the consultation using the Roter interaction analysis system (RIAS), the main variable being the percentage of utterances in relation to EHR use during the first 10 minutes.
Results
Male physicians (residents) and those with less clinical experience and conducting a new consultation or addressing biomedical content were positively correlated with EHR use (+5.3% for male physicians, P=0.101; +0.6% per year of experience, P=0.021; +6.0% for new consultation, P=0.097; +0.4% per 1% of biomedical content increase; P=0.018).
Conclusion
Only a small number of physician, patient and consultation factors appear to have an impact on the use of EHR during primary care consultations, and this impact remains modest. Given the influence of EHR use on physician–patient relationship, further research should explore what other factors are implicated in EHR use and whether they can be changed or improved.
Acknowledgments
The authors thank the physicians and the patients who took part in the study as well as Denis Roberge from “Entre les lignes Inc.” for the RIAS coding work. The study was supported by a fund from the Faculty of Medicine of the Geneva University (Mimosa).
Author contributions
All authors contributed toward data analysis, drafting and critically revising the paper and agree to be accountable for all aspects of the work.
Disclosure
The authors report no conflicts of interest in this work.