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 Addressing clinician documentation burden through “targeted solutions” is a growing priority for many organizations ranging from government and academia to industry. Between January and February 2021, the 25 by 5: Symposium to Reduce Documentation Burden on US Clinicians by 75% (25X5 Symposium) convened across 2 weekly 2-hour sessions among experts and stakeholders to generate actionable goals for reducing clinician documentation over the next 5 years. Throughout this web-based symposium, we passively collected attendees’ contributions to a chat functionality—with their knowledge that the content would be deidentified and made publicly available. This presented a novel opportunity to synthesize and understand participants’ perceptions and interests from chat messages. We performed a content analysis of 25X5 Symposium chat logs to identify themes about reducing clinician documentation burden. OBJECTIVE The objective of this study was to explore unstructured chat log content from the web-based 25X5 Symposium to elicit latent insights on clinician documentation burden among clinicians, health care leaders, and other stakeholders using topic modeling. METHODS Across the 6 sessions, we captured 1787 messages among 167 unique chat participants cumulatively; 14 were private messages not included in the analysis. We implemented a latent Dirichlet allocation (LDA) topic model on the aggregated dataset to identify clinician documentation burden topics mentioned in the chat logs. Coherence scores and manual examination informed optimal model selection. Next, 5 domain experts independently and qualitatively assigned descriptive labels to model-identified topics and classified them into higher-level categories, which were finalized through a panel consensus. RESULTS We uncovered ten topics using the LDA model: (1) determining data and documentation needs (422/1773, 23.8%); (2) collectively reassessing documentation requirements in electronic health records (EHRs) (252/1773, 14.2%); (3) focusing documentation on patient narrative (162/1773, 9.1%); (4) documentation that adds value (147/1773, 8.3%); (5) regulatory impact on clinician burden (142/1773, 8%); (6) improved EHR user interface and design (128/1773, 7.2%); (7) addressing poor usability (122/1773, 6.9%); (8) sharing 25X5 Symposium resources (122/1773, 6.9%); (9) capturing data related to clinician practice (113/1773, 6.4%); and (10) the role of quality measures and technology in burnout (110/1773, 6.2%). Among these 10 topics, 5 high-level categories emerged: consensus building (821/1773, 46.3%), burden sources (365/1773, 20.6%), EHR design (250/1773, 14.1%), patient-centered care (162/1773, 9.1%), and symposium comments (122/1773, 6.9%). CONCLUSIONS We conducted a topic modeling analysis on 25X5 Symposium multiparticipant chat logs to explore the feasibility of this novel application and elicit additional insights on clinician documentation burden among attendees. Based on the results of our LDA analysis, consensus building, burden sources, EHR design, and patient-centered care may be important themes to consider when addressing clinician documentation burden. Our findings demonstrate the value of topic modeling in discovering topics associated with clinician documentation burden using unstructured textual content. Topic modeling may be a suitable approach to examine latent themes presented in web-based symposium chat logs.

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.

A senior staff registered nurse on an orthopaedic inpatient rehabilitation unit in an urban orthopaedic hospital utilized a "cocktail" of warm prune juice, lemon juice, and Senokot liquid for patients who presented to the rehabilitation unit after orthopaedic surgery without having had an initial postoperative bowel movement (BM). A pilot study (n = 30) using a quasi-experimental design was conducted to evaluate the effect of the cocktail versus liquid Senokot alone on the first postoperative BM. Several measurement tools were used, including the Bristol Stool Scale, visual analog scales to determine pain and strain, and a BM quality scale. A small sample size became even smaller when only 80% of participants had a BM within the study time frame. Therefore, significant findings were difficult to establish. Additional research is needed to adequately assess the effect of the Senokot "cocktail" on postoperative constipation in the rehabilitation population.