News Feature | March 10, 2015

CDC Reports On EHR Use In The Emergency Department

By Megan Williams, contributing writer

CDC Reports On EHR Use In The Emergency Department

While EHR (electronic health records) adoption overall is slowing, past growth patterns in EHR adoption in hospital emergency departments (EDs) and outpatient departments (OPDs) might give interested vendors insight into an area of potential current growth, and a recent report from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) provides a look at those numbers.

Overview

During the survey period of 2006 to 2011, a significant increase in the use of EHR systems was found. Use in the ED increased 84 percent, while use in the OPD increased 73 percent.

The study differentiates between general EHR systems, and “Basic” systems, which it defines as any system that includes the functionalities of:

  • patient history and demographics
  • physician clinical notes
  • patient problem lists
  • computerized prescription orders
  • ability to view laboratory and imaging results via electronic methods
  • comprehensive listings of patient medications and allergies

The increase is attributed the HITECH (Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health) Act of 2009 monetary incentives, which fall under the Meaningful Use program.

Key Findings

In the OPD, use of a basic EHR system jumped from 9 percent (2007) to 57 percent in 2011. From 2006 to 2011, general EHR system use increased from 29 percent to 73 percent.

Regarding Meaningful Use, over the five years of the study, it was found that EDs that had EHR systems able to support Stage 1 Meaningful Use objectives increased in these four objectives:

  • providing reminders for guideline-based interventions (28 percent to 40)
  • recording patient problem lists (from 45 percent to 65)
  • providing warnings of drug contraindications or interactions (28 percent to 43)
  • ordering prescriptions (39 percent to 63)

For OPDs, the statistics were as follows:

  • providing guideline-based interventions (increase from 21 percent to 46)
  • recording patient problem lists (28 percent to 70)
  • ordering prescriptions (27 percent to 60)
  • providing warning or contraindications (from 21 percent to 48)

Limitations

The study was somewhat limited in its evaluation of Meaningful Use. As it states,

“This study is limited in that its estimate of hospital readiness for Stage 1 Meaningful Use objectives overestimates hospital readiness because NHAMCS [National Hospital Ambulatory Medical Care Survey] only measures 9 of 14 objectives, and hospital departments are limited to EDs and OPDs. To receive Meaningful Use incentive payments, hospitals have to meet 14 core set objectives and 5 of 10 menu set objectives.”