EHR Definition, Attributes and Essential Requirements Version 1.1

(This report is also published as Appendix E of: Philip Aspden, Janet M. Corrigan, Julie Wolcott, Shari M. Erickson (Editors) (Committee on Data Standards for Patient Safety). Patient Safety: Achieving a New Standard for Care. Board on Health Care Services, Institute of Medicine, p430-467, November 2003.)

" PURPOSE: This paper reviews the research literature on electronic health record (EHR) systems. The aim is to find out (1) how electronic health records are defined, (2) how the structure of these records is described, (3) in what contexts EHRs are used, (4) who has access to EHRs, (5) which data components of the EHRs are used and studied, (6) what is the purpose of research in this field, (7) what methods of data collection have been used in the studies reviewed and (8) what are the results of these studies. METHODS: A systematic review was carried out of the research dealing with the content of EHRs. A literature search was conducted on four electronic databases: Pubmed/Medline, Cinalh, Eval and Cochrane. RESULTS: The concept of EHR comprised a wide range of information systems, from files compiled in single departments to longitudinal collections of patient data. Only very few papers offered descriptions of the structure of EHRs or the terminologies used. EHRs were used in primary, secondary and tertiary care. Data were recorded in EHRs by different groups of health care professionals. Secretarial staff also recorded data from dictation or nurses' or physicians' manual notes. Some information was also recorded by patients themselves; this information is validated by physicians. It is important that the needs and requirements of different users are taken into account in the future development of information systems. Several data components were documented in EHRs: daily charting, medication administration, physical assessment, admission nursing note, nursing care plan, referral, present complaint (e.g. symptoms), past medical history, life style, physical examination, diagnoses, tests, procedures, treatment, medication, discharge, history, diaries, problems, findings and immunization. In the future it will be necessary to incorporate different kinds of standardized instruments, electronic interviews and nursing documentation systems in EHR systems. The aspects of information quality most often explored in the studies reviewed were the completeness and accuracy of different data components. It has been shown in several studies that the use of an information system was conducive to more complete and accurate documentation by health care professionals. The quality of information is particularly important in patient care, but EHRs also provide important information for secondary purposes, such as health policy planning. CONCLUSION: Studies focusing on the content of EHRs are needed, especially studies of nursing documentation or patient self-documentation. One future research area is to compare the documentation of different health care professionals with the core information about EHRs which has been determined in national health projects. The challenge for ongoing national health record projects around the world is to take into account all the different types of EHRs and the needs and requirements of different health care professionals and consumers in the development of EHRs. A further challenge is the use of international terminologies in order to achieve semantic interoperability. "

" This report deals with the following: Why EHRs? - Understanding Various Concepts - CPR - Patient-carried Medical Record - Computerized Medical Record - Electronic Patient Record - Electronic Medical Record - Digital Medical Record - Patient Medical Record Information - Personal Health Record - Electronic Health Record - Current Hurdles Facing EHRs - The Survey on EHR Trends and Usages - Functions of the EHR - Dimensions of the EHR - Applications, not Records - Small Steps toward EHR Adoption. "

" ... EMRs are computerized legal clinical records created in CDOs, such as hospitals and physician offices. EHRs represent the ability to easily share medical information among stakeholders and to allow it to follow the patient through various modalities of care from different CDOs. ... "

The paper introduces the Yearbook's section on EHRs.

" It is often asked: what is the difference between health IT and IT in other domains? One well-known answer is “the patient”. Systems in other domains such as banking and airline reservation have “customers” or “travellers” but these are grossly simplified abstract versions of a person. “Patients” in clinical systems are anything but: their biological and social complexity is manifested directly in clinical information, posing a far greater challenge than in other domains. ... "

" Published requirements for the EHR are principally available via ISO 18308. They are statements defining the generic features necessary in any Electronic Health Record for it to be communicable and complete, retain integrity across systems, countries and time, and be a useful and effective ethico-legal record of care. Examples of requirements are provided in four themes: EHR functional requirements; Ethical, legal, and security requirements; Clinical requirements; Technical requirements. The main logical building blocks of an EHR are described using the terminology of CEN TC251 ENV13606. Examples are given of the placement of attributes to satisfy contextual and other requirements at the level of specific building blocks. A worked example of the use of the building blocks is given for the request-report cycle for an imaging investigation. "

" The openEHR Foundation is an independent, not-for-profit organisation and community, facilitating the creation and sharing of health records by consumers and clinicians via open-source, standards-based implementations. It was formed as a union of ten-year international R&D efforts in specifying the requirements, information models and implementation of comprehensive and ethico-legally sound electronic health record systems. Between 2000 and 2004 it has grown to having an on-line membership of over 300, published a wide range of EHR information viewpoint specifications. Several groups have now begun collaborative software development, within an open source framework. This chapter summarises the formation of openEHR, its research underpinning, practical demonstrators, the principle design concepts, and the roles openEHR members are playing in international standards. "

" The electronic medical record (EMR) will constitute the core of a computerized health care system in the near future. The electronic storage of clinical information will create the potential for computer-based tools to help clinicians significantly enhance the quality of medical care and increase the efficiency of medical practice. These tools may include reminder systems that identify patients who are due for preventative care interventions, alerting systems that detect contraindications among prescribed medications, and coding systems that facilitate the selection of correct billing codes for patient encounters. Numerous other "decision-support" tools have been developed and may soon facilitate the practice of clinical medicine. The potential of such tools will not be realized, however, if the EMR is just a set of textual documents stored in a computer, i.e. a "word-processed" patient chart. To support intelligent and useful tools, the EMR must have a systematic internal model of the information it contains and must support the efficient capture of clinical information in a manner consistent with this model. Although commercially available EMR systems that have such features are appearing, the builders and the buyers of EMR systems must continue to focus on the proper design of these systems if the benefits of computerization are to be fully realized. "

" Institutions all want electronic medical record (EMR) systems. They want them to solve their record movement problems, to improve the quality and coherence of the care process, to automate guidelines and care pathways to assist clinical research, outcomes management, and process improvement. EMRs are very difficult to construct because the existing electronic data sources, e.g., laboratory systems, pharmacy systems, and physician dictation systems, reside on many isolated islands with differing structures, differing levels of granularity, and different code systems. To accelerate EMR deployment we need to focus on the interfaces instead of the EMR system. We have the interface solutions in the form of standards: IP, HL7/ASTM, DICOM, LOINC, SNOMED, and others developed by the medical informatics community. We just have to embrace them. One remaining problem is the efficient capture of physician information in a coded form. Research is still needed to solve this last problem. "

" In this paper we assess the value of electronic health care information exchange and interoperability (HIEI) between providers (hospitals and medical group practices) and independent laboratories, radiology centers, pharmacies, payers, public health departments, and other providers. We have created an HIEI taxonomy and combined published evidence with expert opinion in a cost-benefit model. Fully standardized HIEI could yield a net value of $77.8 billion per year once fully implemented. Nonstandardized HIEI offers smaller positive financial returns. The clinical impact of HIEI for which quantitative estimates cannot yet be made would likely add further value. A compelling business case exists for national implementation of fully standardized HIEI. "

" A systematic review of the literature was performed to examine the impact of electronic health records (EHRs) on documentation time of physicians and nurses and to identify factors that may explain efficiency differences across studies. In total, 23 papers met our inclusion criteria; five were randomized controlled trials, six were posttest control studies, and 12 were one-group pretest-posttest designs. Most studies (58%) collected data using a time and motion methodology in comparison to work sampling (33%) and self-report/survey methods (8%). A weighted average approach was used to combine results from the studies. The use of bedside terminals and central station desktops saved nurses, respectively, 24.5% and 23.5% of their overall time spent documenting during a shift. Using bedside or point-of-care systems increased documentation time of physicians by 17.5%. In comparison, the use of central station desktops for computerized provider order entry (CPOE) was found to be inefficient, increasing the work time from 98.1% to 328.6% of physician's time per working shift (weighted average of CPOE-oriented studies, 238.4%). Studies that conducted their evaluation process relatively soon after implementation of the EHR tended to demonstrate a reduction in documentation time in comparison to the increases observed with those that had a longer time period between implementation and the evaluation process. This review highlighted that a goal of decreased documentation time in an EHR project is not likely to be realized. It also identified how the selection of bedside or central station desktop EHRs may influence documentation time for the two main user groups, physicians and nurses. "

" The electronic medical record (EMR) is slowly replacing the paper chart for documenting patient details. As the adoption curve for EMRs rapidly increases, so will the need for clinical terminologies. Currently, administrative classifications such as ICD-9-CM, CPT and HCPCS serve not only billing and reporting purposes, but also are used by healthcare providers for documentation and capturing patient procedures and problem lists. But the use of clinical terminologies, such as SNOMED CT, will assume the interface role in EMRs and thus replace these administrative classifications at the point of care. These billing terminologies will then be relegated back to the coders and payers for use, enabling the clinicians to document using richer and more granular terminologies. During this transition phase to the clinical terminology, training will likely be required as healthcare providers adjust to using terminologies in more robust ways. Clinical informaticists and early adopters will play a role in this training and help to demonstrate the many advantages of richer documentation. The use of clinical standards in EMRs is one of the key evolutions in informatics. "

" BACKGROUND: Despite a consensus that the use of health information technology should lead to more efficient, safer, and higher-quality care, there are no reliable estimates of the prevalence of adoption of electronic health records in U.S. hospitals. METHODS: We surveyed all acute care hospitals that are members of the American Hospital Association for the presence of specific electronic-record functionalities. Using a definition of electronic health records based on expert consensus, we determined the proportion of hospitals that had such systems in their clinical areas. We also examined the relationship of adoption of electronic health records to specific hospital characteristics and factors that were reported to be barriers to or facilitators of adoption. RESULTS: On the basis of responses from 63.1% of hospitals surveyed, only 1.5% of U.S. hospitals have a comprehensive electronic-records system (i.e., present in all clinical units), and an additional 7.6% have a basic system (i.e., present in at least one clinical unit). Computerized provider-order entry for medications has been implemented in only 17% of hospitals. Larger hospitals, those located in urban areas, and teaching hospitals were more likely to have electronic-records systems. Respondents cited capital requirements and high maintenance costs as the primary barriers to implementation, although hospitals with electronic-records systems were less likely to cite these barriers than hospitals without such systems. CONCLUSIONS: The very low levels of adoption of electronic health records in U.S. hospitals suggest that policymakers face substantial obstacles to the achievement of health care performance goals that depend on health information technology. A policy strategy focused on financial support, interoperability, and training of technical support staff may be necessary to spur adoption of electronic-records systems in U.S. hospitals. "

"BACKGROUND: Electronic health records (EHRs) are widely viewed as useful tools for supporting the provision of high quality healthcare. However, evidence regarding their effectiveness for this purpose is mixed, and existing studies have generally considered EHR usage a binary factor and have not considered the availability and use of specific EHR features. OBJECTIVE: To assess the relationship between the use of an EHR and the use of specific EHR features with quality of care. RESEARCH DESIGN: A statewide mail survey of physicians in Massachusetts conducted in 2005. The results of the survey were linked with Healthcare Effectiveness Data and Information Set (HEDIS) quality measures, and generalized linear regression models were estimated to examine the associations between the use of EHRs and specific EHR features with quality measures, adjusting for physician practice characteristics. SUBJECTS: A stratified random sample of 1884 licensed physicians in Massachusetts, 1345 of whom responded. Of these, 507 had HEDIS measures available and were included in the analysis (measures are only available for primary care providers). MEASURE: Performance on HEDIS quality measures. RESULTS: The survey had a response rate of 71%. There was no statistically significant association between use of an EHR as a binary factor and performance on any of the HEDIS measure groups. However, there were statistically significant associations between the use of many, but not all, specific EHR features and HEDIS measure group scores. The associations were strongest for the problem list, visit note and radiology test result EHR features and for quality measures relating to women's health, colon cancer screening, and cancer prevention. For example, users of problem list functionality performed better on women's health, depression, colon cancer screening, and cancer prevention measures, with problem list users outperforming nonusers by 3.3% to 9.6% points on HEDIS measure group scores (all significant at the P < 0.05 level). However, these associations were not universal. CONCLUSIONS: Consistent with past studies, there was no significant relationship between use of EHR as a binary factor and performance on quality measures. However, availability and use of specific EHR features by primary care physicians was associated with higher performance on certain quality measures. These results suggest that, to maximize health care quality, developers, implementers and certifiers of EHRs should focus on increasing the adoption of robust EHR systems and increasing the use of specific features rather than simply aiming to deploy an EHR regardless of functionality. "

" BACKGROUND: Electronic health records (EHRs) have been promoted as an important tool to improve quality of care. We examined the association between EHR components, a complete EHR, and the quality of care. METHODS: Using data from the 2005 National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey and the National Hospital Ambulatory Medical Care Survey, we conducted a cross-sectional analysis of all visits with an established primary care provider and examined the association between presence of EHR components and: (1) blood pressure control; and (2) receipt of appropriate therapy for chronic conditions. We examined similar associations for complete EHRs which we defined as one that includes physician and nursing notes, electronic reminder system, computerized prescription order entry, test results, and computerized test order entry. We constructed multivariate models to examine the association between EHR components and each outcome controlling for patient sociodemographic, health, physician practice, and geographic factors. RESULTS: We found no association between electronic physician notes and blood pressure control or receipt of appropriate therapies, with the exception of inhaled steroids among asthmatics (adjusted odds ratio 2.86; 95% confidence interval, 1.12-7.32). We found no association between electronic reminder systems and blood pressure control or receipt of appropriate therapies, with the exception of angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors or angiotensin receptor blockers in patients with diabetes with hypertension (odds ratio 2.58; 95% confidence interval, 1.22-5.42). We found no association between electronic physician notes and any measure of quality. We found no relationship between having a complete EHR and any of the quality measures investigated. CONCLUSIONS: We found no consistent association between blood pressure control, management of chronic conditions, and specific EHR components. Future research focusing on how an EHR is implemented and used and how care is integrated through an EHR will improve our understanding of the impact of EHRs on the quality of care. "

" "

" BACKGROUND: Electronic health records (EHRs) are increasingly used by US outpatient physicians. They could improve clinical care via clinical decision support (CDS) and electronic guideline-based reminders and alerts. Using nationally representative data, we tested the hypothesis that a higher quality of care would be associated with EHRs and CDS. METHODS: We analyzed physician survey data on 255 402 ambulatory patient visits in nonfederal offices and hospitals from the 2005-2007 National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey and National Hospital Ambulatory Medical Care Survey. Based on 20 previously developed quality indicators, we assessed the relationship of EHRs and CDS to the provision of guideline-concordant care using multivariable logistic regression. RESULTS: Electronic health records were used in 30% of an estimated 1.1 billion annual US patient visits. Clinical decision support was present in 57% of these EHR visits (17% of all visits). The use of EHRs and CDS was more likely in the West and in multiphysician settings than in solo practices. In only 1 of 20 indicators was quality greater in EHR visits than in non-EHR visits (diet counseling in high-risk adults, adjusted odds ratio, 1.65; 95% confidence interval, 1.21-2.26). Among the EHR visits, only 1 of 20 quality indicators showed significantly better performance in visits with CDS compared with EHR visits without CDS (lack of routine electrocardiographic ordering in low-risk patients, adjusted odds ratio, 2.88; 95% confidence interval, 1.69-4.90). There were no other significant quality differences. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings indicate no consistent association between EHRs and CDS and better quality. These results raise concerns about the ability of health information technology to fundamentally alter outpatient care quality. "

" OBJECTIVE: To evaluate a national programme to develop and implement centrally stored electronic summaries of patients' medical records. DESIGN: Mixed-method, multilevel case study. SETTING: English National Health Service 2007-10. The summary care record (SCR) was introduced as part of the National Programme for Information Technology. This evaluation of the SCR considered it in the context of national policy and its frontline implementation and use in three districts. Participants and methods Quantitative data (cumulative records created nationally plus a dataset of 416 325 encounters in participating primary care out-of-hours and walk-in centres) were analysed statistically. Qualitative data (140 interviews including policy makers, managers, clinicians, and software suppliers; 2000 pages of ethnographic field notes including observation of 214 clinical consultations; and 3000 pages of documents) were analysed thematically and interpretively. RESULTS: Creating individual SCRs and supporting their adoption and use was a complex, technically challenging, and labour intensive process that occurred more slowly than planned. By early 2010, 1.5 million such records had been created. In participating primary care out-of-hours and walk-in centres, an SCR was accessed in 4% of all encounters and in 21% of encounters where one was available; these figures were rising in some but not all sites. The main determinant of SCR access was the identity of the clinician: individual clinicians accessed available SCRs between 0 and 84% of the time. When accessed, an SCR seemed to support better quality care and increase clinician confidence in some encounters. There was no direct evidence of improved safety, but findings were consistent with a rare but important positive impact on preventing medication errors. SCRs sometimes contained incomplete or inaccurate data, but clinicians drew judiciously on these data along with other sources. SCR use was not associated with shorter consultations or reduction in onward referral. Successful introduction of SCRs depended on interaction between multiple stakeholders from different worlds (clinical, political, technical, commercial) with different values, priorities, and ways of working. The programme's fortunes seemed to turn on the ability of change agents to bridge these different institutional worlds, align their conflicting logics, and mobilise implementation effort. CONCLUSIONS: Benefits of centrally stored electronic summary records seem more subtle and contingent than many stakeholders anticipated, and clinicians may not access them. Complex interdependencies, inherent tensions, and high implementation workload should be expected when they are introduced on a national scale. "

" Electronic referrals and discharge summaries can improve the quality and timeliness of clinical communication. The electronic summary care record (SCR) extends the concept of digital health summaries to create a perpetually updated and centrally stored summary of care, extracting key data from local systems after each encounter. The only major SCR evaluation to date, in England, found that rates of usage were low, and any impact on care was difficult to quantify. The SCR is seen by some as a first step to building a national distributed shared electronic health record (SEHR). However, the SCR may be a problematic diversion, creating a need for centralised databases, while the SEHR can function by sharing locally stored records, letters and discharge summaries. Uncertainty about the quality and provenance of SCR data raises concerns about patient safety, as key data may be absent and old data may persist, partly because of a lack of ownership of the summary. A national e-health strategy should emphasise the true stepping stones to a distributed and shared electronic record, including encouraging the uptake and meaningful use of electronic clinical records, clinical messaging, electronic discharge summaries and letters, and services such as decision support and e-prescribing, all of which have good evidence to support them. "