News Feature | August 21, 2015

Study Assesses Impact Of HITECH Act On EHR Adoption

Christine Kern

By Christine Kern, contributing writer

Healthcare Study

Findings suggest the MU program has had little impact on EHR adoption.

The Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health (HITECH) Act has provided physicians with funding incentives to adopt EHRs via the meaningful use (MU) program established to improve healthcare outcomes. Now, a JAMIA study examines how the MU program affected EHR adoption prior to the Act to provide a basis of comparison.

The JAMIA study, Impact of the HITECH act on physicians’ adoption of electronic health records, found that adoption of any EHR system may have increased by 7 percent above the level predicted without MU subsidies. But, the authors note, “the estimate lacks statistical significance and becomes smaller or negative under alternative model specifications. No substantial effects were found for Basic systems” and “the models suggest that adoption was largely driven by ‘imitation’ effects as physicians mimic their peers’ technology use or respond to mandates. Small and often insignificant ‘motivation’ effects are found suggesting little enthusiasm by physicians who are leaders in technology adoption.”

The authors concluded there is weak evidence to support that the MU program exercised any significant impact on EHR uptake, explaining, “This is consistent with reports that many current EHR systems reduce physician productivity, lack data sharing capabilities, and need to incorporate other key interoperability features.”

In a recent survey sponsored by Kareo, Physicians Practice 2015 Technology Survey, 15 percent of 1,181 respondents reported their biggest challenge was a drop in productivity due to their EHR, followed by interoperability between EHRs (14 percent), and EHR adoption and implementation (14 percent).

And among those respondents who had not yet purchased an EHR, 30.9 percent said it was because they did not believe it would improve patient care, 28.4 percent cited cost as a barrier, and 11.3 percent stated that they could not find a product that meets their unique needs.

And almost seven in ten respondents reported that their EHR had not produced a return on investment (ROI), while 37 percent reported seeing fewer patients post-EHR, 37 percent who have not yet completed successful MU Stage 1 attestation, and 21 percent who reported that their EHR vendor had not yet met Stage 2 certification requirements.