IMPACT OF ADVANCED VERSUS BASIC ELECTRONIC-MEDICAL-RECORD SYSTEMS ON THE QUALITY OF PATIENT CARE- A META-ANALYSIS OF 10 RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIALS
Author(s)
Desai VC*1;Kelton CM2, Heaton PC1 1University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, OH, USA, 2University of Cincinnati College of Business, Cincinnati, OH, USA
OBJECTIVES: Over the last decade, federal and state initiatives have encouraged the adoption of electronic-medical-record (EMR) systems in hospitals, emergency departments, and physician offices and clinics. These systems may have the potential to prevent adverse drug events, decrease healthcare costs, as well as improve care itself. Although accumulated evidence suggests that a basic EMR system with patient demographics and laboratory results improves healthcare over no system, less evidence is available on the relative advantages, if any, of a more advanced system, which also allows electronic reminders for interventions and screenings. Hence, the objective of the study was to conduct a meta-analysis of the available evidence to measure the impact of an advanced EMR system relative to a basic system on the quality of patient care given by providers. METHODS: Electronic databases, including MEDLINE and Google-Scholar, were searched for randomized controlled trials related to the objective. The composite outcome measure, termed quality of patient care, was defined as whether screening, diagnosis, providing recommended treatment, or counseling were provided during the visit. Sub-group analyses were performed for screening and providing recommended treatment. Studies with large variances were excluded. Heterogeneity was assessed using the I2 statistic. Because I2 exceeded 50%, a random-effects model was used. RESULTS: Ten studies which included 1,867 providers were included. The odds of care were 1.77 (95% CI: 0.98-3.21; p=0.059) times higher for providers with an advanced EMR system compared to those with a basic system. Sub-group analyses showed that the odds of screening patients were 1.07 (95% CI: 1.02-1.13; p=0.005) times higher and providing recommended treatment were 1.11 (95% CI: 0.91-1.35; p=0.32) times higher, compared to the basic system. CONCLUSIONS: Relative to providers with basic EMR systems, those with advanced systems were only slightly more effective in terms of the overall care rate and the screening rate.
Conference/Value in Health Info
2013-05, ISPOR 2013, New Orleans, LA, USA
Value in Health, Vol. 16, No. 3 (May 2013)
Code
PHS111
Topic
Health Service Delivery & Process of Care, Real World Data & Information Systems
Topic Subcategory
Health & Insurance Records Systems, Quality of Care Measurement
Disease
Multiple Diseases