ACR Meeting Abstracts

ACR Meeting Abstracts

  • Meetings
    • ACR Convergence 2024
    • ACR Convergence 2023
    • 2023 ACR/ARP PRSYM
    • ACR Convergence 2022
    • ACR Convergence 2021
    • ACR Convergence 2020
    • 2020 ACR/ARP PRSYM
    • 2019 ACR/ARP Annual Meeting
    • 2018-2009 Meetings
    • Download Abstracts
  • Keyword Index
  • Advanced Search
  • Your Favorites
    • Favorites
    • Login
    • View and print all favorites
    • Clear all your favorites
  • ACR Meetings

Abstract Number: 1190

A Quality Improvement Project to Increase Documentation Efficiency in an Academic Rheumatology Practice

David Leverenz1, Jon Golenbiewski 1, Brian Andonian 1, Katherine Kaufman 1, Philip Chu 1, Mithunan Maheswaranathan 1, Andrew Johannemann 1, Jayanth Doss 2 and Lisa Criscione-Schreiber 2, 1Duke University, Durham, NC, 2Duke University, Durham

Meeting: 2019 ACR/ARP Annual Meeting

Keywords: documentation, Efficient and Electronic Health Record, quality improvement

  • Tweet
  • Email
  • Print
Session Information

Date: Monday, November 11, 2019

Title: Measures Of Healthcare Quality Poster II: Improving Care

Session Type: Poster Session (Monday)

Session Time: 9:00AM-11:00AM

Background/Purpose: All providers, including rheumatologists, spend approximately half of their day documenting in an electronic health record (EHR). Excessive documentation is a key contributor to burnout, which is associated with reduced quality of care and poor patient satisfaction. We performed a quality improvement project to increase documentation efficiency in an academic rheumatology practice.

Methods: We used Signal, an Epic analytic data tool, to obtain documentation performance metrics. Our primary aim was to reduce average “time in notes per appointment” from over 10 min to 8 min (Epic’s nationwide rheumatology average). Secondary measures included average time in the EHR from 7pm-7am and note composition metrics. To assess need and impact, we distributed a pre and post-survey to providers in our practice regarding their documentation practices, satisfaction with documentation time, and engagement with interventions. Using Plan-Do-Study-Act (PDSA) methodology, we conducted these cycles: (1) dictation training, (2) a presentation on recommendations to increase efficiency, and (3) optional individual training sessions with EHR experts. Signal data was recorded weekly except for 7pm-7am time, which was recorded monthly. Data is analyzed using descriptive statistics.

Results: Average “time in notes per appointment” was 11.4 min at baseline, 12 min after PDSA1, 11 min after PDSA2, and 11 min after PDSA3 (Figure 1). Average time in the EHR from 7pm-7am was 33.3 min at baseline vs. 29 min after PDSA1 and 24 min after PDSA2, data pending from PDSA3 (Figure 2). Average note composition percentages at baseline vs. after PDSA1, 2, and 3 were: manual entry 14.3 vs. 12, 12, and 9.6%; dictation 9.3 vs. 12, 11, and 13%; copy/paste 15.9 vs. 10, 12, and 13%; smart tool 61.3 vs. 66, 66, and 65%. Average documentation length was 6.25K characters at baseline vs. 5.7K, 6.5K and 5.3K (Figure 3). Twenty-five of 27 (93%) providers responded to both the pre and post-surveys. Satisfaction with documentation time on the pre- vs. post-survey was: “completely” or “very dissatisfied” 44% vs. 32%; “dissatisfied” 40% vs. 40%; and “satisfied” 16% vs. 28%. Respondents wrote notes from home “often” or “almost always” in 60% vs. 37.5%. Missing out on activities outside of work in order to finish notes occurred “often” or “almost always” for 24% vs. 12.5%. Regarding engagement with interventions, 32% of post-survey respondents reported newly using dictation software, 36% increased their use of dictation, and 52% modified note templates.

Conclusion: Though we did not meet our aim of reducing average time in notes per appointment, interventions led to providers using more dictation and smart tools with a corresponding reduction in manual data entry. Perhaps most importantly, both Signal and survey data suggested that providers spent less time in the EHR at home after our interventions; the percentage reporting missing out on activities outside work to document dropped by half. Practice-wide focus on improving documentation efficiency led to improved satisfaction with the documentation process and enabled providers to enjoy more activities outside of work. Future measurement targets may include care quality and burnout metrics.


Figure 1

Figure 1: Time in Notes per Appointment


Figure 2

Figure 2: Time in the EHR From 7pm to 7am


Figure 3

Figure 3: Note Composition


Disclosure: D. Leverenz, None; J. Golenbiewski, None; B. Andonian, None; K. Kaufman, None; P. Chu, None; M. Maheswaranathan, None; A. Johannemann, None; J. Doss, None; L. Criscione-Schreiber, None.

To cite this abstract in AMA style:

Leverenz D, Golenbiewski J, Andonian B, Kaufman K, Chu P, Maheswaranathan M, Johannemann A, Doss J, Criscione-Schreiber L. A Quality Improvement Project to Increase Documentation Efficiency in an Academic Rheumatology Practice [abstract]. Arthritis Rheumatol. 2019; 71 (suppl 10). https://acrabstracts.org/abstract/a-quality-improvement-project-to-increase-documentation-efficiency-in-an-academic-rheumatology-practice/. Accessed .
  • Tweet
  • Email
  • Print

« Back to 2019 ACR/ARP Annual Meeting

ACR Meeting Abstracts - https://acrabstracts.org/abstract/a-quality-improvement-project-to-increase-documentation-efficiency-in-an-academic-rheumatology-practice/

Advanced Search

Your Favorites

You can save and print a list of your favorite abstracts during your browser session by clicking the “Favorite” button at the bottom of any abstract. View your favorites »

All abstracts accepted to ACR Convergence are under media embargo once the ACR has notified presenters of their abstract’s acceptance. They may be presented at other meetings or published as manuscripts after this time but should not be discussed in non-scholarly venues or outlets. The following embargo policies are strictly enforced by the ACR.

Accepted abstracts are made available to the public online in advance of the meeting and are published in a special online supplement of our scientific journal, Arthritis & Rheumatology. Information contained in those abstracts may not be released until the abstracts appear online. In an exception to the media embargo, academic institutions, private organizations, and companies with products whose value may be influenced by information contained in an abstract may issue a press release to coincide with the availability of an ACR abstract on the ACR website. However, the ACR continues to require that information that goes beyond that contained in the abstract (e.g., discussion of the abstract done as part of editorial news coverage) is under media embargo until 10:00 AM ET on November 14, 2024. Journalists with access to embargoed information cannot release articles or editorial news coverage before this time. Editorial news coverage is considered original articles/videos developed by employed journalists to report facts, commentary, and subject matter expert quotes in a narrative form using a variety of sources (e.g., research, announcements, press releases, events, etc.).

Violation of this policy may result in the abstract being withdrawn from the meeting and other measures deemed appropriate. Authors are responsible for notifying colleagues, institutions, communications firms, and all other stakeholders related to the development or promotion of the abstract about this policy. If you have questions about the ACR abstract embargo policy, please contact ACR abstracts staff at [email protected].

Wiley

  • Online Journal
  • Privacy Policy
  • Permissions Policies
  • Cookie Preferences

© Copyright 2025 American College of Rheumatology