Skip to main content
Log in

Primary Care Physicians’ Use of an Electronic Medical Record System: A Cognitive Task Analysis

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Journal of General Internal Medicine Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To describe physicians’ patterns of using an Electronic Medical Record (EMR) system; to reveal the underlying cognitive elements involved in EMR use, possible resulting errors, and influences on patient–doctor communication; to gain insight into the role of expertise in incorporating EMRs into clinical practice in general and communicative behavior in particular.

DESIGN

Cognitive task analysis using semi-structured interviews and field observations.

PARTICIPANTS

Twenty-five primary care physicians from the northern district of the largest health maintenance organization (HMO) in Israel.

RESULTS

The comprehensiveness, organization, and readability of data in the EMR system reduced physicians’ need to recall information from memory and the difficulty of reading handwriting. Physicians perceived EMR use as reducing the cognitive load associated with clinical tasks. Automaticity of EMR use contributed to efficiency, but sometimes resulted in errors, such as the selection of incorrect medication or the input of data into the wrong patient’s chart. EMR use interfered with patient–doctor communication. The main strategy for overcoming this problem involved separating EMR use from time spent communicating with patients. Computer mastery and enhanced physicians’ communication skills also helped.

CONCLUSIONS

There is a fine balance between the benefits and risks of EMR use. Automaticity, especially in combination with interruptions, emerged as the main cognitive factor contributing to errors. EMR use had a negative influence on communication, a problem that can be partially addressed by improving the spatial organization of physicians’ offices and by enhancing physicians’ computer and communication skills.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Figure 1
Figure 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Bates DW, Gawande AA. Improving safety with information technology. N Engl J Med. 2003;348(25):2526–2534.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Chaudhry B, Wang J, Wu S, Maglione M, Mojica W, Roth E, et al. Systematic review: impact of health information technology on quality, efficiency, and costs of medical care. Ann Intern Med. 2006;144(10):742–752.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Lejbkowicz I, Denekamp Y, Reis S, Goldenberg D. Electronic medical record systems in Israel’s public hospitals. Isr Med Assoc J. 2004;6:583–587.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Laerum H, Ellingsen G, Faxvaag A. Doctors’ use of electronic medical records systems in hospitals: cross sectional survey. BMJ. 2001;323(7325):1344–1348.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Mikulich VJ, Liu YC, Steinfeldt J, Schriger DL. Implementation of clinical guidelines through an electronic medical record: physician usage, satisfaction and assessment. Int J Med Inform. 2001;63(3):169–178.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Patel VL, Kushniruk AW, Yang S, Yale JF. Impact of a computer-based patient record system on data collection, knowledge organization, and reasoning. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2000;7(6):569–585.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Campbell EM, Sittig DF, Ash JS, Guappone KP, Dykstra RH. Types of unintended consequences related to computerized provider order entry. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2006;13(5):547–556.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Ash JS, Sittig DF, Dykstra RH, Guappone K, Carpenter JD, Seshadri V. Categorizing the unintended sociotechnical consequences of computerized provider order entry. Int J Med Inform. 2007;76 Suppl 1:21–27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Han YY, Carcillo JA, Venkataraman ST, Clark RS, Watson RS, Nguyen TC, et al. Unexpected increased mortality after implementation of a commercially sold computerized physician order entry system. Pediatrics. 2005;116(6):1506–1512.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Sullivan F, Wyatt JC. How computers help make efficient use of consultations. BMJ. 2005;331(7523):1010–1012.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Sullivan F, Wyatt JC. How computers can help to share understanding with patients. BMJ. 2005;331(7521):892–894.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Epstein RM, Hundert EM. Defining and assessing professional competence. JAMA. 2002;287(2):226–235.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) Outcome Project. 2008. Available at: http://www.acgme.org/Outcome/. Accessed: September 18, 2008.

  14. Shachak A, Reis S. The impact of electronic medical records on patient–doctor communication during consultation: a narrative literature review. J Eval Clin Pract 2008, in press.

  15. Margalit RS, Roter D, Dunevant MA, Larson S, Reis S. Electronic medical record use and physician–patient communication: an observational study of Israeli primary care encounters. Patient Educ Couns. 2006;61(1):134–141.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Makoul G, Curry RH, Tang PC. The use of electronic medical records: communication patterns in outpatient encounters. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2001;8(6):610–615.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Ventres W, Kooienga S, Vuckovic N, Marlin R, Nygren P, Stewart V. Physicians, Patients, and the electronic health record: an ethnographic analysis. Ann Fam Med. 2006;4(2):124–131.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Booth N, Robinson P, Kohannejad J. Identification of high-quality consultation practice in primary care: the effects of computer use on doctor–patient rapport. Inform Prim Care. 2004;12(2):75–83.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Miettola J, Mantyselka P, Vaskilampi T. Doctor–patient interaction in Finnish primary health care as perceived by first year medical students. BMC Med Educ. 2005;5(1):34.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Ventres W, Kooienga S, Marlin R, Vuckovic N, Stewart V. Clinician style and examination room computers: a video ethnography. Fam Med. 2005;37(4):276–281.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Rouf E, Whittle J, Lu N, Schwartz MD. Computers in the exam room: differences in physician–patient interaction may be due to physician experience. J Gen Intern Med. 2007;22(1):43–48.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Chandler P, Sweller J. Cognitive load theory and the format of instruction. Cogn Instr. 1991;8(4):293–332.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Simon HA, Chase WG. Skill in chess. Am Sci. 1973;61(4):394–403.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Eysenck MW. Psychology: an International Perspective. New York: Psychology Press; 2004.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Sweller J. Cognitive load during problem-solving: effects on learning. Cogn Sci. 1988;12(2):257–285.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Fernandez-Duque D, Johnson ML. Attention metaphors: How metaphors guide the cognitive psychology of attention. Cogn Sci. 1999;23(1):83–116.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Wheatley T, Wegner DM. Automaticity of action, psychology of. In: Smelser NJ, Baltes PB, eds. International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences. Oxford: Pergamon; 2001:991–993.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Toft B, Mascie-Taylor H. Involuntary automaticity: a work-system induced risk to safe health care. Health Serv Manage Res. 2005;18(4):211–216.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Green M. Error and injury in computers & medical devices. 2004. Available at: http://www.expertlaw.com/library/computers/computer_negligence.html. Accessed: Sep 18, 2008.

  30. Green M. Nursing error. 2004. Available at: http://www.visualexpert.com/Resources/nursingerror.html Accessed: September 18, 2008.

  31. Dreyfus S, Dreyfus H. A Five-stage Model of the Mental Activities Involved in Directed Skill Acquisition. Berkeley: University of California; 1980.

    Google Scholar 

  32. Benner P. Using the Dreyfus model of skill acquisition to describe and interpret skill acquisition and clinical judgment in nursing practice and education. Bull Sci Technolo Soc. 2004;24(3):188–199.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Militello LG, Hutton RJ. Applied cognitive task analysis (ACTA): a practitioner’s toolkit for understanding cognitive task demands. Ergonomics. 1998;41(11):1618–1641.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  34. Clicks®—medical information system. Available at: http://www.roshtov.com/ Accessed: Sep 18, 2008.

  35. Strauss AL, Corbin JM. Basics of Qualitative Research: Grounded Theory Procedures and Techniques. Newbury Park (CA): Sage; 1990.

    Google Scholar 

  36. Shuval K, Shachak A, Linn S, Brezis M, Reis S. Evaluating primary care doctors’ evidence-based medicine skills in a busy clinical setting. J Eval Clin Pract. 2007;13(4):576–580.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Simborg DW. Promoting electronic health record adoption. Is it the correct focus? J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2008;15(2):127–129.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Walker JM, Carayon P, Levenson N, Paulus RA, Tooker J, Chin H, et al. EHR safety: the way forward to safe and effective systems. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2008;15:272–277.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Weir CR, Nebeker JJ, Hicken BL, Campo R, Drews F, Lebar B. A cognitive task analysis of information management strategies in a computerized provider order entry environment. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2007;14(1):65–75.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Borycki EM, Lemieux-Charles L. Does a hybrid electronic-paper environment impact on health professional information seeking? Stud Health Technol Inform. 2008;136:505–510.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  41. Collins S, Currie L, Patel V, Bakken S, Cimino JJ. Multitasking by clinicians in the context of CPOE and CIS use. Medinfo. 2007;12(Pt 2):958–962.

    Google Scholar 

  42. Collins S, Currie L, Bakken S, Cimino JJ. Interruptions during the use of a CPOE system for MICU rounds. AMIA Annu Symp Proc. 2006:895.

  43. Thielke S, Hammond K, Helbig S. Copying and pasting of examinations within the electronic medical record. Int J Med Inform. 2007;76 Suppl 1:122–128.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Frankel R, Altschuler A, George S, Kinsman J, Jimison H, Robertson NR, et al. Effects of exam-room computing on clinician–patient communication: a longitudinal qualitative study. J Gen Intern Med. 2005;20(8):677–682.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. McGrath JM, Arar NH, Pugh JA. The influence of electronic medical record usage on nonverbal communication in the medical interview. Health Inform J. 2007;13(2):105–118.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Chan W-S, Stevenson M, McGlade K. Do general practitioners change how they use the computer during consultations with a significant psychological component? Int J Med Inform. In press [corrected proof]. Epub 2007 Nov 22.

  47. Classen DC, Avery AJ, Bates DW. Evaluation and certification of computerized provider order entry systems. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2007;14(1):48–55.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Kushniruk A, Borycki E, Kuwata S, Kannry J. Predicting changes in workflow resulting from healthcare information systems: ensuring the safety of healthcare. Healthc Q. 2006;9 Spec No.114–118.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Chipman S, Schraagen J, Shalin V. Introduction to cognitive task analysis. In: Schraagen J, Chipman S, Shalin V, eds. Cognitive Task Analysis. Mahwah (NJ): Lawrence Erlbaum Associates; 2000.

    Google Scholar 

  50. Kushniruk AW, Patel VL. Cognitive and usability engineering methods for the evaluation of clinical information systems. J Biomed Inform. 2004;37(1):56–76.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank the primary care physicians who took part in the study. We also greatly appreciate the administrative assistance of Mrs. Ivette Trujillo-Mordetzki. The first author was supported by a fellowship from the Israel Council of Higher Education and Galil Center. This study was supported by a research grant from Israel National Institute of Health Policy and Health Services Research. Roshtov, an EMR vendor, provided their platform (which is used by our study participants) for the research team to examine during the development of the research protocol and analysis of findings. Preliminary results of this study were presented at the annual meeting of the Israeli Association for Information Systems (ILAIS), 2006, and at Human Factors Engineering in Health Informatics conference, Arhus, Denmark, 2007.

Conflict of Interest

Shmuel Reis was a consultant for GMN (PHR provider) until August 2006. Roshtov, an EMR vendor, provided their platform (which is used by our study participants) for the research team to examine during the development of the research protocol and analysis of findings. We do not see any financial implications for these companies from this publication.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Aviv Shachak PhD.

Appendices

APPENDIX A: Cognitive Task Analysis (CTA)

CTA is a methodology for characterizing and describing the cognitive elements underlying goal generation, decision-making, reasoning, and information processing. It also permits the identification of the role of expertise in performing complex tasks.33,49,50 Typically, CTA involves interviews, or a combination of interviews and observations, with six to eight Subject Matter Experts (SMEs). In the present study a specific variant of CTA was employed—Applied Cognitive Task Analysis (ACTA)33—with some modifications. The CTA involved a combination of semi-structured interviews and direct observations that we then used to create a task diagram, identify potential errors, and study the effects of EMR use on patient–doctor communication.

APPENDIX B: Interview questions

Adapted from Militello and Hutton32.

  1. 1.

    Background details

    1. a.

      Demographics: gender, specialty, years since graduation of medical school, time since finishing residency (for residents: stage of residency).

    2. b.

      Observe the spatial organization of the doctor’s office: where do the doctor and patient sit? Where are the computer and the screen? Is the screen constant or mobile?

    3. c.

      Please define your level of experience in using the EMR (if the interviewee has difficulty answering this question offer a scale: non-user, novice, experienced user, expert user?). How long have you been using the EMR?

  2. 2.

    Task diagram

    1. a.

      Please describe the main stages of a typical patient visit and how you use the EMR in it? (The purpose is to get a broad picture of the visit, without getting into too many details. You may ask the physician to demonstrate how s/he uses the EMR.)

    2. b.

      Of the steps you have just identified, which require difficult cognitive skills? By cognitive skills I mean judgments, assessments, problem solving skills, etc.

    3. c.

      If the interviewee does not refer to these issues, use probes like: Which stages especially require consciousness and attention? Which actions are done automatically? At what stages have you made errors in the past? Can you give an example? At which stages have you paid close attention to communication with the patient?

  3. 3.

    Knowledge audit

    1. a.

      Experienced/expert users: what advice would you have for a resident who just started working with the EMR? OR

    2. b.

      Resident/novice users: What advice can you give others about using the EMR?

    3. c.

      During the time you have been working with the EMR, are there ways of working smart or accomplishing more with less that you have found especially useful?

    4. d.

      Can you think of a time when you realized you would have to change the way you were working with the EMR? Follow-up probes: to avoid medical errors? To improve communication with patients?

    5. e.

      Were there times when you had to rely on experience to avoid being led astray by the EMR? Probe: can you give me an example?

    6. f.

      Would you like to add anything?

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Shachak, A., Hadas-Dayagi, M., Ziv, A. et al. Primary Care Physicians’ Use of an Electronic Medical Record System: A Cognitive Task Analysis. J GEN INTERN MED 24, 341–348 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11606-008-0892-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11606-008-0892-6

KEY WORDS

Navigation