Initial Observations of Electronic Medical Record Usage During CT and MRI Interpretation: Frequency of Use and Impact on Workflow
- 1 July 2010
- journal article
- research article
- Published by American Roentgen Ray Society in American Journal of Roentgenology
- Vol. 195 (1) , 188-193
- https://doi.org/10.2214/ajr.09.2946
Abstract
OBJECTIVE. Electronic medical record (EMR) systems permit integration of contextual nonimaging EMR data into examination interpretation; however, the extra effort required to search and review these nonradiologic data are not well characterized. We assessed the gross frequency and pattern of EMR usage in the interpretation of diagnostic CT and MRI examinations. SUBJECTS AND METHODS. We defined nonradiologic EMR data as laboratory data, nonimaging specialty report, clinical note, and administrative data not available on PACS. For abdominal, neuroradiologic, and musculoskeletal CT and MRI, we prospectively recorded the time required for image analysis (including prior imaging studies and their reports), nonradiologic EMR use, and initial report drafting by fellows and staff in randomized sessions. We assessed EMR use as a fraction of work activity and according to technique, subspecialty, inpatient status, and radiologist experience. RESULTS. We observed 372 CT and MRI interpretations by 33 radiologists. For CT, radiologists used the EMR in 34% of abdominal, 57% of neuroradiologic, and 38% of musculoskeletal interpretations. For MRI, EMR was used in 73% of abdominal, 56% of neuroradiologic, and 33% of musculoskeletal interpretations. For CT, EMR usage comprised 18%, 14%, and 18% of diagnostic effort (image analysis plus EMR use) for abdominal, neuroradiologic, and musculoskeletal interpretations, respectively; for MRI, EMR usage comprised 21%, 16%, and 15% of diagnostic effort for abdominal, neuroradiologic, and musculoskeletal interpretations, respectively. Frequency of EMR use was significantly greater for neuroradiology CT and abdominal MRI (p < 0.05, Fisher's test). EMR usage was not consistently related to inpatient status for CT or radiologist experience. CONCLUSION. For CT and MRI interpretation, EMR usage is frequent and comprises a significant fraction of diagnostic effort.Keywords
This publication has 12 references indexed in Scilit:
- Use of Electronic Health Records in U.S. HospitalsNew England Journal of Medicine, 2009
- Workload of Radiologists in the United States in 2002–2003 and Trends Since 1991–1992Radiology, 2005
- Utilization of Radiology Services in the United States: Levels and Trends in Modalities, Regions, and PopulationsRadiology, 2005
- Will the Wave Finally Break? A Brief View of the Adoption of Electronic Medical Records in the United StatesJournal of the American Medical Informatics Association, 2004
- Factors and Forces Affecting EHR System Adoption: Report of a 2004 ACMI DiscussionJournal of the American Medical Informatics Association, 2004
- Accelerating U.S. EHR Adoption: How to Get There From Here. Recommendations Based on the 2004 ACMI RetreatJournal of the American Medical Informatics Association, 2004
- Improving Safety with Information TechnologyNew England Journal of Medicine, 2003
- From PACS to integrated EMRComputerized Medical Imaging and Graphics, 2003
- Patient Risk Factors for Adverse Drug Events in Hospitalized PatientsArchives of internal medicine (1960), 1999
- Effects of Computer-based Clinical Decision Support Systems on Clinician Performance and Patient Outcome: A Critical Appraisal of ResearchAnnals of Internal Medicine, 1994