Free EMR Newsletter Want to receive the latest news on EMR, Meaningful Use, ARRA and Healthcare IT sent straight to your email? Join thousands of healthcare pros who subscribe to EMR and EHR for FREE!

External Incentives Key Factor In HIT Adoption By Small PCPs

Posted on January 25, 2017 I Written By

Anne Zieger is veteran healthcare consultant and analyst with 20 years of industry experience. Zieger formerly served as editor-in-chief of FierceHealthcare.com and her commentaries have appeared in dozens of international business publications, including Forbes, Business Week and Information Week. She has also contributed content to hundreds of healthcare and health IT organizations, including several Fortune 500 companies. Contact her at @ziegerhealth on Twitter or visit her site at Zieger Healthcare.

A new study appearing in The American Journal of Managed Care concludes that one of the key factors influencing health IT adoption by small primary care practices is the availability of external incentives.

To conduct the study, researchers surveyed 566 primary care groups with eight or fewer physicians on board. Their key assumption, based on previous studies, was that PCPs were more likely to adopt HIT if they had both external incentives to change and sufficient internal capabilities to move ahead with such plans.

Researchers did several years’ worth of research, including one survey period between 2007 and 2010 and a second from 2012 to 2013. The proportion of practices reporting that they used only paper records fell by half from one time period to the other, from 66.8% to 32.3%. Meanwhile, the practices adopted higher levels of non-EMR health technology.

The mean health IT summary index – which tracks the number of positive responses to 18 questions on usage of health IT components – grew from 4.7 to 7.3. In other words, practices implemented an average of 2.6 additional health IT functions between the two periods.

Utilization rates for specific health IT technologies grew across 16 of the 18 specific technologies listed. For example, while just 25% of practices reported using e-prescribing tech during the first period of the study, 70% reported doing so during the study’s second wave. Another tech category showing dramatic growth was the proportion of practices letting patients view their medical record, which climbed from one percent to 19% by the second wave of research.

Researchers also took a look at the impact factors like practice size, ownership and external incentives had on the likelihood of health IT use. As expected, practices owned by hospitals instead of doctors had higher mean health IT scores across both waves of the survey. Also, practices with 3 to 8 physicians onboard had higher scores than those were one or two doctors.

In addition, external incentives were another significant factor predicting PCP technology use. Researchers found that greater health IT adoption was associated with pay-for-performance programs, participation in public reporting of clinical quality data and a greater proportion of revenue from Medicare. (Researchers assumed that the latter meant they had greater exposure to CMS’s EHR Incentive Program.)

Along the way, the researchers found areas in which PCPs could improve their use of health IT, such as the use of email of online medical records to connect with patients. Only one-fifth of practices were doing so at the time of the second wave of surveys.

I would have liked to learn more about the “internal capabilies” primary care practices would need, other than having access to hospital dollars, to get the most of health IT tools. I’d assume that elements such as having a decent budget, some internal IT expertise and management support or important, but I’m just speculating. This does give us some interesting lessons on what future adoption on new technology in healthcare will look like and require.

Do Primary Care Physicians Have A Bigger Stake in EMR Adoption?

Posted on April 30, 2011 I Written By

Katherine Rourke is a healthcare journalist who has written about the industry for 30 years. Her work has appeared in all of the leading healthcare industry publications, and she’s served as editor in chief of several healthcare B2B sites.

Here’s a theory I’ve been working on — one which I’ve come to doubt — but I’ll put it out there anyway and see what readers think. As I’ve watched the slow, painful process of physician EMR adoption, I’ve had the sense that primary care physicians were under the most pressure to move ahead and were likely to lead the parade.

Sure, everyone has their eye on HITECH incentives, but primary care doctors have even more to worry about. For starters, they have a more challenging  population management task at hand.  Now, they’re under even more pressure, being expected to provide a “medical home” for patients, do more monitoring of their condition, coordinate specialist care and check up on patients’ compliance with preventive health measures.

In theory, PCPs can do such monitoring on paper, and some actually do.  But one can only assume that it’d be easier to manage these increasing levels of responsibility  — and to provide the extensive quality data health plans demand — if they get an EMR in place quickly.

Sure, I hear plenty about specialist EMR adoption, and technology for specific specialty niches, but my gut feeling has remained that primary care doctors have the most to lose if they don’t move quickly.

However, search though I might, I can’t find any anecdotal or statistical data to support my conclusion, so maybe I’m way off here.  Folks, what are you hearing?  Are primary care doctors adopting EMRs at a faster rate than their specialist colleagues, or are specialists picking up the ball at a similar pace?