Home Research Research Library Impact of response bias in three surveys on primary care providers’ experiences with electronic health records Impact of response bias in three surveys on primary care providers’ experiences with electronic health records 2024 Author(s) Hendrix, Nathaniel, Maisel, Natalya, Everson, Jordan, Patel, Vaishali, Bazemore, Andrew W, Rotenstein, Lisa S, Holmgren, A Jay, Krist, Alex H, Adler-Milstein, Julia, and Phillips, Robert L Topic(s) Achieving Health System Goals Keyword(s) JABFM Policy Brief, and Physician Experience (Burnout / Satisfaction) Volume Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association Source Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association OBJECTIVE: To identify impacts of different survey methodologies assessing primary care physicians’ (PCPs’) experiences with electronic health records (EHRs), we compared three surveys: the 2022 Continuous Certification Questionnaire (CCQ) from the American Board of Family Medicine, the 2022 University of California San Francisco (UCSF) Physician Health IT Survey, and the 2021 National Electronic Health Records Survey (NEHRS). MATERIALS AND METHODS: We evaluated differences between survey pairs using Rao-Scott corrected chi-square tests, which account for weighting. RESULTS: CCQ received 3991 responses from PCPs (100% response rate), UCSF received 1375 (3.6% response rate), and NEHRS received 858 (18.2% response rate). Substantial, statistically significant differences in demographics were detected across the surveys. CCQ respondents were younger and more likely to work in a health system; NEHRS respondents were more likely to work in private practice; and UCSF respondents disproportionately practiced in larger academic settings. Many EHR experience indicators were similar between CCQ and NEHRS, but CCQ respondents reported higher documentation burden. DISCUSSION: The UCSF approach is unlikely to supply reliable data. Significant demographic differences between CCQ and NEHRS raise response bias concerns, and while there were similarities in some reported EHR experiences, there were important, significant differences. CONCLUSION: Federal EHR policy monitoring and maintenance require reliable data. This test of existing and alternative sources suggest that diversified data sources are necessary to understand physicians’ experiences with EHRs and interoperability. Comprehensive surveys administered by specialty boards have the potential to contribute to these efforts, since they are likely to be free of response bias. ABFM Research Read all 2014 Cost, utilization and quality of care: An evaluation of Illinois Medicaid Primary Care Case Management Program Go to Cost, utilization and quality of care: An evaluation of Illinois Medicaid Primary Care Case Management Program 2019 Endoscopic Services in the United States: By Whom, for What, and Why? Go to Endoscopic Services in the United States: By Whom, for What, and Why? 2016 Family Physicians’ Quality Interventions and Performance Improvement for Hypertension through Maintenance of Certification Go to Family Physicians’ Quality Interventions and Performance Improvement for Hypertension through Maintenance of Certification 2021 FROM ABFM: IMPLEMENTING A NATIONAL VISION FOR HIGH QUALITY PRIMARY CARE: NEXT STEPS Go to FROM ABFM: IMPLEMENTING A NATIONAL VISION FOR HIGH QUALITY PRIMARY CARE: NEXT STEPS
Author(s) Hendrix, Nathaniel, Maisel, Natalya, Everson, Jordan, Patel, Vaishali, Bazemore, Andrew W, Rotenstein, Lisa S, Holmgren, A Jay, Krist, Alex H, Adler-Milstein, Julia, and Phillips, Robert L Topic(s) Achieving Health System Goals Keyword(s) JABFM Policy Brief, and Physician Experience (Burnout / Satisfaction) Volume Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association Source Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association
ABFM Research Read all 2014 Cost, utilization and quality of care: An evaluation of Illinois Medicaid Primary Care Case Management Program Go to Cost, utilization and quality of care: An evaluation of Illinois Medicaid Primary Care Case Management Program 2019 Endoscopic Services in the United States: By Whom, for What, and Why? Go to Endoscopic Services in the United States: By Whom, for What, and Why? 2016 Family Physicians’ Quality Interventions and Performance Improvement for Hypertension through Maintenance of Certification Go to Family Physicians’ Quality Interventions and Performance Improvement for Hypertension through Maintenance of Certification 2021 FROM ABFM: IMPLEMENTING A NATIONAL VISION FOR HIGH QUALITY PRIMARY CARE: NEXT STEPS Go to FROM ABFM: IMPLEMENTING A NATIONAL VISION FOR HIGH QUALITY PRIMARY CARE: NEXT STEPS
2014 Cost, utilization and quality of care: An evaluation of Illinois Medicaid Primary Care Case Management Program Go to Cost, utilization and quality of care: An evaluation of Illinois Medicaid Primary Care Case Management Program
2019 Endoscopic Services in the United States: By Whom, for What, and Why? Go to Endoscopic Services in the United States: By Whom, for What, and Why?
2016 Family Physicians’ Quality Interventions and Performance Improvement for Hypertension through Maintenance of Certification Go to Family Physicians’ Quality Interventions and Performance Improvement for Hypertension through Maintenance of Certification
2021 FROM ABFM: IMPLEMENTING A NATIONAL VISION FOR HIGH QUALITY PRIMARY CARE: NEXT STEPS Go to FROM ABFM: IMPLEMENTING A NATIONAL VISION FOR HIGH QUALITY PRIMARY CARE: NEXT STEPS