Objective Although nurses comprise the largest group of health professionals and electronic health record (EHR) user base, it is unclear how EHR use has affected nurse well-being. This systematic review assesses the multivariable (ie, organizational, nurse, and health information technology [IT]) factors associated with EHR-related nurse well-being and identifies potential improvements recommended by frontline nurses. Materials and Methods We searched MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, ProQuest, and Web of Science for literature reporting on EHR use, nurses, and well-being. A quality appraisal was conducted using a previously developed tool. Results Of 4583 articles, 12 met inclusion criteria. Two-thirds of the studies were deemed to have a moderate or low risk of bias. Overall, the studies primarily focused on nurse- and IT-level factors, with 1 study examining organizational characteristics. That study found worse nurse well-being was associated with EHRs compared with paper charts. Studies on nurse-level factors suggest that personal digital literacy is one modifiable factor to improving well-being. Additionally, EHRs with integrated displays were associated with improved well-being. Recommendations for improving EHRs suggested IT-, organization-, and policy-level solutions to address the complex nature of EHR-related nurse well-being. Conclusions The overarching finding from this synthesis reveals a critical need for multifaceted interventions that better organize, manage, and display information for clinicians to facilitate decision making. Our study also suggests that nurses have valuable insight into ways to reduce EHR-related burden. Future research is needed to test multicomponent interventions that address these complex factors and use participatory approaches to engage nurses in intervention development.

Editor's Note: This article is part of a series that describes the many ways that the US Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) interacts with the emergency care system. DHHS includes many divisions that are well known to the health care world, including the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, the Health Resources and Services Administration, the National Institutes of Health, and the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. The goal of the series is to increase the visibility of federal emergency care-related activities within the emergency care community.

Background: After-hours documentation burden among US clinicians is often uncompensated work and has been associated with burnout, leading health systems to identify root causes and seek interventions to reduce this. A few studies have suggested quality programme participation (e.g., Merit-Based Incentive Payment System [MIPS]) was associated with a higher administrative burden. However, the association between MIPS participation and after-hours documentation has not been fully explored. Thus, this study aims to assess whether participation in the MIPS programme was independently associated with after-hours documentation burden.Methods: We used 2021 data from the National Electronic Health Records Survey.We used a multivariable ordinal logistic regression model to assess whether MIPS participation was associated with the amount of after-hours documentation burden when controlling for other factors. We controlled for physician age, specialty, sex, number of practice locations, number of physicians, practice ownership, whether team support (e.g., scribes) is used for documentation tasks, and whether the practice accepts Medicaid patients.Results: We included 1801 office-based US physician respondents with complete data for variables of interest. After controlling for other factors, MIPS participation was associated with greater odds of spending a greater number of hours on afterhours documentation (odds ratio = 1.44, 95% confidence interval 1.06-1.95).

In 2019, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services began implementing the Patients Over Paperwork (POP) initiative in response to clinicians reporting burdensome documentation regulations. To date, no study has evaluated how these policy changes have influenced documentation burden.Methods: Our data came from the electronic health records of an academic health system. Using quantile regression models, we assessed the association between the implementation of POP and clinical documentation word count using data from family medicine physicians in an academic health system from January 2017 to May 2021 inclusive. Studied quantiles included the 10th, 25th, 50th, 75th, and 90th quantiles. We controlled for patient-level (race/ethnicity, primary language, age, comorbidity burden), visit-level (primary payer, level of clinical decision making involved, whether a visit was done through telemedicine, whether a visit was for a new patient), and physician-level (sex) characteristics.Results: We found that the POP initiative was associated with lower word counts across all of the quantiles. In addition, we found lower word counts among notes for private payers and telemedicine visits. Conversely, higher word counts were observed in notes that were written by female physicians, notes for new patient visits, and notes involving patients with greater comorbidity burden.Conclusions: Our initial evaluation suggests that documentation burden, as measured by word count, has declined over time, particularly following implementation of the POP in 2019. Additional research is needed to see whether the same occurs when examining other medical specialties, clinician types, and longer evaluation periods.