Original Article

EMR Use Among Rural and Urban Alabama Family Medicine Physicians

Authors: Melanie T. Tucker, PhD, John C. Higginbotham, PhD, MPH, Jason M. Parton, PhD

Abstract

Objectives: The purpose of this study was to determine the adoption of electronic medical records (EMR) by rural and urban Alabama family medicine physicians.


Methods: This cross-sectional study evaluated EMR use among Alabama family medicine physicians (N = 1197).


Results: Half (49.3%) of the physicians surveyed reported using EMR in their practices; however, only 16.3% reported using EMR to its fullest capacity. The majority (49.9%) were categorized as nonusers, whereas basic users comprised 12.4%, moderate users made up 19.7%, and comprehensive users were 16.7% of the total. A physician’s age (P < 0.001) and years of professional practice (P = 0.002) correlate significantly with EMR use. EMR users (mean 48.48, standard deviation [SD] 9.93; mean 18.63, SD 10.58) were significantly younger and had been in practice for a shorter time than non-EMR users (mean 52.92, SD 12.01, and mean 22.44, SD 13.04, respectively).


Conclusion: This study allowed for the exploration of the current level of EMR use, the identification of individual user characteristics, and the identification of organizational user characteristics.

This content is limited to qualifying members.

Existing members, please login first

If you have an existing account please login now to access this article or view purchase options.

Purchase only this article ($25)

Create a free account, then purchase this article to download or access it online for 24 hours.

Purchase an SMJ online subscription ($75)

Create a free account, then purchase a subscription to get complete access to all articles for a full year.

Purchase a membership plan (fees vary)

Premium members can access all articles plus recieve many more benefits. View all membership plans and benefit packages.

References

1. Institute of Medicine. Crossing the Quality Chasm: A Health System for the Twenty-First Century. Washington, DC, National Academies Press, 2001.
 
2. US Department of Health & Human Services. Healthy People 2010. 2nd ed. Washington, DC, US Government Printing Office, 2000.
 
3. US Department of Health & Human Services. Healthy People 2020. 2nd ed. Washington, DC, US Government Printing Office, 2010.
 
4. HIMSS White Paper. EMR Sophistication Correlates to Hospital Quality Data. Chicago: Healthcare Information and Management Systems Society; 2006.
 
5. Poon EG, Wright A, Simon SR, et al. Relationship between use of electronic health record features and health care quality. Med Care 2010; 48: 203–209.
 
6. Cebul RD, Love TE, Jain AK. Electronic health records and quality of diabetes care. N Engl J Med. 2011; 365 (9): 825–833.
 
7. Institute of Medicine: To Err Is Human: Building a Safer Health System. Washington, DC, National Academy Press, 1999.
 
8. HIMSS. Ambulatory Healthcare IT Survey. HIMSS Analytics. 2008. Available at: www.himssanalytics.org/docs/2008ambulatory_final.pdf. Accessed January 18, 2011
 
9. HIMSS Survey. 14th Annual HIMSS Leadership Survey. 2003. Available at: www.himss.org/2003survey. Accessed January 18, 2011.
 
10. DesRoches CM, Campbell EG, Sowmya RR, et al. Electronic health records in ambulatory care—a national survey of physicians. N Engl J Med 2008; 359: 50–60.
 
11. Ash JS, Bates DW. Factors and forces affecting EHR system adoption: report of a 2004 ACMI discussion. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2005; 12: 8–12.
 
12. Brooks R, Menachemi N, Burke D, et al. Rural-urban difference in patient safety-related information technology utilization. J Med Syst 2005; 29: 103–109.
 
13. Menachemi N, Langley A, Brooks RG. The use of information technologies among rural and urban physicians in Florida. J Med Syst 2007; 31: 483–488.
 
14. Alabama Rural Health Association. Rural versus urban Alabama comparisons. 2003. Available at: http://www.arhaonline.org/rururbcomp.htm. Accessed June 1, 2010.
 
15. Institute for Rural Health Research, University of Alabama School of Medicine, Tuscaloosa Campus. Black Belt Fact Book. Tuscaloosa: University of Alabama; 2000.
 
16. Rogers E. Diffusion of Innovations. New York, Free Press, 2003, 5th ed.
 
17. Moore M. Characteristics of users of medical innovations. University of Arkansas.1993. Internet document. Available at: http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/iel5/6788/18221/00842304.pdf. Accessed March 25, 2011.
 
18. Burt CW, Sisk JE. Which physicians and practices are using electronic medical records? Health Aff 2005; 24: 1334–1343.
 
19. Menachemi V, Matthews MC, Ford EW, et al. The influence of payer mix on electronic health record adoption by physicians. Health Care Manage Rev 2007; 32: 111–118.
 
20. Marshall JG. Characteristics of early adopters of end-user online search in the health professions. Bull Med Libr Assoc 1989; 77: 48–55.
 
21. Alabama Department of Public Health and The Alabama Rural Health Association. Selected Indicators of Health Status in Alabama. 2007. Available at: http://www.arhaonline.org/PDF%20Files/Statewide.pdf. Accessed July 28, 2011.