Monitoring InBaskets With Feedback to Providers Enhances the Timeliness of Patient Care

J Oncol Pract. 2018 May;14(5):e310-e315. doi: 10.1200/JOP.17.00103. Epub 2018 Apr 11.

Abstract

Purpose: Electronic health records have changed providers' workflow. Epic's InBasket supplants traditional communication and is a central hub for clinical information. Failure to promptly complete records impairs communication and revenue collection. By tracking providers' InBasket activities and offering feedback, we hoped to improve InBasket management and interdisciplinary communication.

Methods: We created a report to track 273 providers' InBasket activities, including ambulatory transcriptions, chart cosignatures, order cosignatures, patient calls, results, and billable encounters. The report showed how often and for how long each activity was delinquent. We completed three Plan-Do-Study-Act cycles. During cycle 1 (November to December 2015), we sent all providers automated e-mails with their monthly results. During cycle 2 (January to April 2016), we focused solely on billable encounter closure and sent targeted e-mails to providers with > 50 delinquent encounters. The e-mails stated that providers had 30 days to complete encounters or their practices would be closed to new patients; at 30 days, noncompliant providers had 60 days before practice suspension. During cycle 3 (May to September 2016), we continued to monitor and send targeted e-mails to providers who accumulated > 50 encounters. We modeled the financial impact of the intervention using net closure data, the report's aging function, and billing logs.

Results: InBasket monitoring with structured feedback decreased open encounters by 53.43%. We did not see improvements in the other metrics that the report tracked. We estimate that $231,724 was saved as a result of the intervention and $349,179 was lost to filing deadlines.

Conclusion: Automated e-mails did not reduce open encounters; targeted e-mails to providers improved InBasket management.

MeSH terms

  • Electronic Health Records*
  • Feedback*
  • Health Personnel*
  • Humans
  • Patient Care / methods*
  • Patient Care / standards*
  • Patient Care Management / methods
  • Patient Care Management / standards
  • Quality of Health Care