Search

Background The widespread adoption of electronic health records and a simultaneous increase in regulatory demands have led to an acceleration of documentation requirements among clinicians. The corresponding burden from documentation requirements is a central contributor to clinician burnout and can lead to an increased risk of suboptimal patient care. Objective To address the problem of documentation burden, the 25 by 5: Symposium to Reduce Documentation Burden on United States Clinicians by 75% by 2025 (Symposium) was organized to provide a forum for experts to discuss the current state of documentation burden and to identify specific actions aimed at dramatically reducing documentation burden for clinicians. Methods The Symposium consisted of six weekly sessions with 33 presentations. The first four sessions included panel presentations discussing the challenges related to documentation burden. The final two sessions consisted of breakout groups aimed at engaging attendees in establishing interventions for reducing clinical documentation burden. Steering Committee members analyzed notes from each breakout group to develop a list of action items. Results The Steering Committee synthesized and prioritized 82 action items into Calls to Action among three stakeholder groups: Providers and Health Systems, Vendors, and Policy and Advocacy Groups. Action items were then categorized into as short-, medium-, or long-term goals. Themes that emerged from the breakout groups' notes include the following: accountability, evidence is critical, education and training, innovation of technology, and other miscellaneous goals (e.g., vendors will improve shared knowledge databases). Conclusion The Symposium successfully generated a list of interventions for short-, medium-, and long-term timeframes as a launching point to address documentation burden in explicit action-oriented ways. Addressing interventions to reduce undue documentation burden placed on clinicians will necessitate collaboration among all stakeholders.

Background Substantial strategies to reduce clinical documentation were implemented by health care systems throughout the coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) pandemic at national and local levels. This natural experiment provides an opportunity to study the impact of documentation reduction strategies on documentation burden among clinicians and other health professionals in the United States. Objectives The aim of this study was to assess clinicians' and other health care leaders' experiences with and perceptions of COVID-19 documentation reduction strategies and identify which implemented strategies should be prioritized and remain permanent post-pandemic. Methods We conducted a national survey of clinicians and health care leaders to understand COVID-19 documentation reduction strategies implemented during the pandemic using snowball sampling through professional networks, listservs, and social media. We developed and validated a 19-item survey leveraging existing post-COVID-19 policy and practice recommendations proposed by Sinsky and Linzer. Participants rated reduction strategies for impact on documentation burden on a scale of 0 to 100. Free-text responses were thematically analyzed. Results Of the 351 surveys initiated, 193 (55%) were complete. Most participants were informaticians and/or clinicians and worked for a health system or in academia. A majority experienced telehealth expansion (81.9%) during the pandemic, which participants also rated as highly impactful (60.1–61.5) and preferred that it remain (90.5%). Implemented at lower proportions, documenting only pertinent positives to reduce note bloat (66.1 ± 28.3), changing compliance rules and performance metrics to eliminate those without evidence of net benefit (65.7 ± 26.3), and electronic health record (EHR) optimization sprints (64.3 ± 26.9) received the highest impact scores compared with other strategies presented; support for these strategies widely ranged (49.7–63.7%). Conclusion The results of this survey suggest there are many perceived sources of and solutions for documentation burden. Within strategies, we found considerable support for telehealth, documenting pertinent positives, and changing compliance rules. We also found substantial variation in the experience of documentation burden among participants.