xRead - Outside the Box (March 2024) - Full Articles

15314995, 2021, 5, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/lary.29073 by Loyola University Health Sciences Library, Wiley Online Library on [19/03/2023]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License

Fig. 3. Boxplots depicting the variation between and among institution for the seven daily PEP data activities. Grey headers indicate the clini cal activity. Statistical analysis for comparison between institutions is provided in Table III. PEP = provide ef fi ciency pro fi le.

compared to attending physicians while APPs saw fewer patients per clinic day (Table II). However, there was no difference between attendings and APPs in progress note length. The variability between institutions for daily PEP data and per appointment PEP data values is depicted in Figures 3 and 4, respectively. Statistical comparisons between institutions identi fi ed likely outlier institutions

writing notes (4.1 4.0 min per appointment) with the remainder of time delineated in Table II and Figure 2B. There was a weak, but statistically signi fi cant relationship between character note length and both time in notes per day (r = 0.177, 95% con fi dence interval [CI], 0.064 – 0.285, P < .002) and time in notes per appointment, (r = 0.212, 95% CI, 0.10 – 0.321, P < .003). All recorded daily and per appointment time PEP values were larger for APPs

Fig. 4. Boxplots depicting the variation between and among institution for the four per appointment PEP metrics. Grey headers indicate the clinical activity. Institution 3 did not have enough providers to calculate per appointment values. PEP = provide ef fi ciency pro fi le.

Laryngoscope 131: May 2021

Giliberto et al.: National Time Spent in EHR

978