The adoption of an electronic health record did not improve A1c values in Type 2 diabetes

Harry B Burke, Dorothy A Becher, Albert Hoang, Ronald W Gimbel

Abstract


Background: A major justification for the clinical adoption of electronic health records (EHRs) was the expectation that it would improve the quality of medical care. No longitudinal study has tested this assumption.


Objective: We used hemoglobin A1c, a recognized clinical quality measure directly related to diabetes outcomes, to assess the effect of EHR use on clinical quality.


Methods: We performed a five-and-one-half-year multicentre longitudinal retrospective study of the A1c values of 537 type 2 diabetic patients. The same patients had to have been seen on at least three occasions: once approximately six months prior to EHR adoption (before-EHR), once approximately six months
after EHR adoption (after-EHR) and once approximately five years after EHR adoption (five-years), for a total of 1,611 notes.

Results: The overall mean confidence interval (CI) A1c values for the before- EHR, after-EHR and five-years were 7.07 (6.91 – 7.23), 7.33 (7.14 – 7.52) and 7.19 (7.06 – 7.32), respectively. There was a small but significant increase in A1c values between before-EHR and after-EHR, p = .04; there were no other significant differences. There was a significant decrease in notes missing at least one A1c value, from 42% before-EHR to 16% five-years (p < .001).


Conclusion: We found that based on patient’s A1c values, EHRs did not improve the clinical quality of diabetic care in six months and five years after EHR adoption. To our knowledge, this is the first longitudinal study to directly assess the relationship
between the use of an EHR and clinical quality.

 


Keywords


quality; medical care; electronic health record; diabetes

Full Text:

PDF HTML

References


Institute of Medicine. Key Capabilities of an Electronic Health Record System. Washington, DC: National Academies Press, 2003.

Bates DW, Ebell M and Gotlieb E et al. A proposal for electronic medical records in U.S. primary care. Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association 2003;10(1):1–10. http://dx.doi.org/10.1197/jamia.M1097. PMid:12509352; PMCid:PMC150354.

Linder JA, Ma J, Bates DW, Middleton B and Stafford RS. Electronic health record use and the quality of ambulatory care in the United States. Archives of Internal Medicine 2007;167:1400–1405. http://dx.doi.org/10.1001/archinte.167.13.1400. PMid:17620534.

Keyhani S, Hebert PL, Ross JS, Federman A, Zhu CW and Siu AL. Electronic health record components and the quality of care. Medical Care 2008;46:1267–1272. http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/MLR.0b013e31817e18ae. PMid:19300317.

Zhou L, Soran CS, Jenter CA, Volk LA, Orav EJ and Bates DW et al. The relationship between electronic health record use and quality of care over time. Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association 2009;16:457–464. http://dx.doi.org/10.1197/jamia.M3128. PMid:19390094; PMCid:PMC2705247.

Friedberg MW, Coltin KL, Safran DG, Dresser M, Zaslavsky AM and Schneider EC et al. Associations between structural capabilities of primary care practices and performance on selected quality measures. Annals of Internal Medicine 2009;151:456–463. http://dx.doi.org/10.7326/0003-4819-151-7-200910060-00006. PMid:19805769.

Walsh MN, Yancy CW, Albert NM, Curtis AB, Stough WG and Gheorghiade M et al. Electronic health records and quality of care for heart failure. Journal of the American Heart Association 2010;159:635–642. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ahj.2010.01.006. PMid:20362723.

Poon EG, Wright A, Simon SR, Jenter CA, Kaushal R and Volk LA et al. Relationship between use of electronic health record features and health care quality: results of a statewide survey. Medical Care 2010;48:203–209. http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/MLR.0b013e3181c16203. PMid:20125047.

Romano MJ and Stafford RS. Electronic health records and clinical decision support systems: impact on national ambulatory care quality. Archives of Internal Medicine 2011;171:897–903. http://dx.doi.org/10.1001/archinternmed.2010.527. PMid:21263077; PMCid:PMC4016790.

Kern LM, Barrón Y, Dhopeshwarkar RV, Edwards A, Kaushal R and HITEC Investigators. Electronic health records and ambulatory quality of care. Journal of General Internal Medicine 2013;28:496–503. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11606-012-2237-8. PMid:23054927; PMCid:PMC3599037.

Sequist TD, Gandhi TK, Karson AS, Fiskio JM, Bugbee D and Sperling M et al. A randomized trial of electronic clinical reminders to improve quality of care for diabetes and coronary artery disease. Journal of the American Heart Association 2005;12:431–437. http://dx.doi.org/10.1197/jamia.M1788. PMid:15802479; PMCid:PMC1174888.

Matheny ME, Sequist TD, Seger AC, Fiskio JM, Sperling M and Bugbee D et al. A randomized trial of electronic clinical reminders to improve medication laboratory monitoring. Journal of the American Heart Association 2008;15:424-429. http://dx.doi.org/10.1197/jamia.M2602. PMid:18436905; PMCid:PMC2442256.

Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. Diabetes mellitus: average HbA1c value for diabetic patients in the clinical information system. Available from http://www.qualitymeasures.ahrq.gov/content.aspx?id=27617&search=Hemoglobin+A1c+measurement. Accessed on 19 June 2014.

Jackson JL, Strong J, Cheng EY and Meyer G. Patients, diagnoses, and procedures in a military internal medicine clinic: comparison with civilian practices. Military Medicine 1999;164(3):194–197. PMid:10091492.

Jackson JL, O’Malley PG and Kroenke K. A psychometric comparison of military and civilian medical practices. Military Medicine 1999;164(2):112–115. PMid:10050567.

Jackson JL, Cheng EY, Jones DL and Meyer G. Comparison of discharge diagnoses and inpatient procedures between military and civilian health care systems. Military Medicine 1999;164(10):701–704. PMid:10544622.

Gimbel RW, Pangaro L and Barbour G. America’s “undiscovered” laboratory for health services research. Medical Care 2010;48(8):751–756. http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/MLR.0b013e3181e35be8. PMid:20613659.

Egede LE, Mueller M, Echols CL and Gebregziabher M. Longitudinal differences in glycemic control by race/ethnicity among veterans with type 2 diabetes. Medical Care 2010;48(6):527–533. http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/MLR.0b013e3181d558dc. PMid:20473215.

Wong ND, Patao C, Wong K, Malik S, Franklin SS and Iloeje U. Trends in control of cardiovascular risk factors among US adults with type 2 diabetes from 1999 to 2010: comparison by prevalent cardiovascular disease status. Diabetes and Vascular Disease Research 2013;10(6):505–13. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1479164113496828. PMid:23975724; PMCid:PMC4227398.

Verdon DR. EHRs: the real story. Why a national outcry from physicians will shake the health information technology sector. Medical Economics 2014;91(3):18–27. PMid:25211940.

American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, Pub L, 111–5, 123 Stat 115.

Steinbrook R. Health care and the American recovery and reinvestment act. The New England Journal of Medicine 2009;360:1057–1060. http://dx.doi.org/10.1056/NEJMp0900665. PMid:19224738.

Hsiao C-J and Hing E. Use and characteristics of electronic health record systems among office-based physician practices: United States, 2001–2012. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Health Statistics Data Brief 2012; (111).

Friedberg MW, Chen PG, Van Busum KR, et al. Factors Affecting Physician Professional Satisfaction and Their Implications for Patient Care, Health Systems, and Health Policy. Rand Corporation, 2013. (p. xvi). Available from http://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/research_reports/RR400/RR439/RAND_RR439.pdf. Accessed on 20 November 2014.

Kellerman AL and Jones SS. What it will take to achieve the as-yet-unfulfilled promises of health information technology. Health Affairs 2013;32(1):63–68. http://dx.doi.org/10.1377/hlthaff.2012.0693. PMid:23297272.

Blumenthal D. Launching HITECH. The New England Journal of Medicine 2010;362:382–385. http://dx.doi.org/10.1056/NEJMp0912825. PMid:20042745.

Jha AK. Meaningful use of electronic health records. The Journal of the American Medical Association 2010;304:1709–1710. http://dx.doi.org/10.1001/jama.2010.1497. PMid:20959581.




DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.14236/jhi.v23i1.144

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


This is an open access journal, which means that all content is freely available without charge to the user or their institution. Users are allowed to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of the articles in this journal starting from Volume 21 without asking prior permission from the publisher or the author. This is in accordance with the BOAI definition of open accessFor permission regarding papers published in previous volumes, please contact us.

Privacy statement: The names and email addresses entered in this journal site will be used exclusively for the stated purposes of this journal and will not be made available for any other purpose or to any other party.

Online ISSN 2058-4563 - Print ISSN 2058-4555. Published by BCS, The Chartered Institute for IT