Improving EMR documentation
One of the most significant hurdles clinicians currently face lies in how EMRs currently store and display documentation. Combined with physician note-taking habits, this makes these systems much less usable than they could be. Longer notes, when displayed in current EMR UIs, mostly lead to clutter, making them harder to navigate and difficult to scan quickly for important information.
The authors identify a few different ways that future EMRs may be able to help with this problem.
EMR documentation tools will likely need to be redesigned to optimize documentation entry, standardize note formatting, and improve readability. Many electronic notes contain vestigial formatting and data left over from the design of paper notes. As a result, many of these electronic notes include information that is stored elsewhere and does not need to be explicitly included in every note. Cutting down on repetitive information storage will make important information more visible and help make patient notes easier to scan.
The paper also recommends a few other features that would make documentation more readable – like allowing clinicians to write documentation in SOAP format (subjective, objective, assessment, and plan), to facilitate critical thinking during the note-taking process, and having the EMR display that documentation in APSO format (assessment, plan, subjective, objective).
Doctors have long called for APSO or another note-taking format. Designing EMRs to rearrange SOAP notes to APSO could be a compromise that improves note readability while not requiring that clinicians learn new note-taking strategies.
The paper’s authors also recommended more extensive clinician training on writing notes. While clinicians are often taught how to write certain notes – like progress notes, histories, and physical and discharge summaries – more specific guidance is not always provided. Better training provided by institutions could help improve the quality and readability of clinician notes.
These changes, however, may not be as beneficial as possible without better institutional support for clinicians. Implementing some of the biggest changes recommended by the SHM will require some level of standardization across platforms and institution commitment to training clinicians on best use practices for EMRs. Improved responsiveness to clinician needs will require a coordinated effort with backing from both administrative and governance groups.
Expanding EMR usability
“Our white paper presents evidence-based recommendations that can be implemented at the ground level in collaboration with other stakeholders, including IT, informatics, and administration, to help improve on the current state,” Dr. Prasad said.
“We believe that hospitalists as key stakeholders in health care, have both the responsibility and are uniquely positioned to directly impact EMR functionality,” he noted. “For example, hospitalists can participate in designing appropriate, actionable alerts that would help with patient safety while also improving provider efficiency. Simple steps like limiting hard stops in order entry to would help speed up the process, and free up time for direct patient care. Availability of tools like secure text messaging would help with effective patient care team communication to improve safety and care delivery.”
EMRs often lack features like voice control and speech-to-text transcription, along withlike compatibility with screen readers. Implementing these features could improve the efficiency of clinicians’ note-taking while also providing wider software usability.
EMRs are not typically designed to work with mobile devices, meaning clinicians cannot enter notes or order medications until they’ve returned to their desk or workstation.
This lack of functionality creates issues in several ways. When clinicians are unable to enter notes on the move, they will need to either keep mental notes or quickly jot down paper notes. This can effectively double the amount of note-taking that clinicians must do or introduce greater room for error. In cases where progress notes are taken throughout the day, this also means the EMR’s documentation timeline may not be accurate or usable.
Requiring clinicians to return to workstations before entering order information can also increase the risk of medication errors, whichthat EMRs could reduce error rates.
Adding support for cross-device and mobile EMR use could help improve the efficiency of note-taking and help cut down on error. Implementing mobile access could have a few different benefits for clinicians – like improving note-taking efficiency in hospitals, where doctors often see patients far away from their workstations.
EMRs also often lack support for certain hardware, like mobile stations and widescreen monitors, which can improve a clinician’s ability to document in real-time and are a better fit in certain work flows.
The SHM paper also recommends a few other tweaks to usability – like reducing the amount of password entry and reentry – that could make these systems easier to use and more efficient.
New features – like theto analyze and organize information contained in clinicians’ notes – could provide further benefits and take full advantage of the advanced technologies that EMRs can integrate.
Dr. Prasad noted, however, that some of these upgrades – especially EMR compatibility with mobile devices – will require some institutional support. Bring-your-own-device policies or system-provided mobile devices will be necessary if institutions want their clinicians to be able to take advantage of mobile EMR access.
These policies will also likely require some kind of mobile device management solution to manage the security of sensitive patient data as it is accessed from personal devices. This may increase the level of necessary institutional buy-in for this support to work.