doctors survey 2015 six-country report · 2015-10-07 · doctors include specialists in a number of...

Doctors Survey 2015 Six-Country Report

Copyright © 2015 Accenture All rights reserved. 2

•  Summary •  Method •  Demographics •  Key Findings

Table of Contents


Now in its third year, Accenture’s multi-country Doctors Survey takes an in-depth look at healthcare IT as it relates to quality of care, and patient and physician engagement.

The 2015 global study was fielded in six countries: Australia, Brazil, England, Norway, Singapore, and the US.

This report includes findings for all six countries. Trended data for 2012 are included where applicable for Australia, England, Singapore, and the US. Trended data are not available for Brazil and Norway, as this is the first year collecting data in these countries.

Summary


Method: Data Collection

Australia Brazil England Norway Singapore US

Number of Completed Interviews 510 504 502 302 200 601

Field Start Date 3-Dec-14 11-Dec-14 3-Dec-14 18-Dec-14 16-Dec-14 2-Dec-14

Field End Date 28-Dec-14 15-Jan-15 23-Dec-14 19-Jan-15 19-Jan-15 8-Dec-14

Average Interview Length (in minutes) 20 min 25 min 16 min 21 min 17 min 15 min

Language English Portuguese English Norwegian English English


With whom did Accenture work to conduct the quantitative survey?

•  Accenture worked with Nielsen Consumer Insights (formerly Harris Interactive), who was responsible for the entire project including recruitment and screening of doctors from a variety of trusted panel partners located in each country.

What kinds of doctors/doctors were surveyed?

•  Primary care and secondary/specialist doctors in Australia, Brazil, England, Norway, Singapore, and the US, who have registered to take part in market research. All work on a full time basis in a mix of private and public practice settings.

•  Primary care doctors include general and family medicine practitioners. Secondary care doctors include specialists in a number of fields including surgery, neurology, endocrinology, rheumatology, oncology and cardiology.

How did Accenture recruit doctors for the study?

•  Doctors were contacted through a web mail out, whereby they were able to follow a unique link to the survey and complete it anonymously. To maximize participation up to two email reminders were sent. Given some cultural nuances in Singapore, doctors (approximately one-third) were recruited via phone and could request assistance to complete the survey in their office, on a tablet, provided by an interviewer. The interviewer only “assisted” if the doctors had (technical) questions while completing the survey.

Method


Are we confident in the quality of the respondents and that they meet the study criteria?

•  All doctors’ details are double verified when they join the panel and were rescreened for this study to ensure participant quality.

What did we do to ensure balance and a representative sample across regions, specialties, etc.?

•  Regular quota updates ensured that all subsequent mail outs and recruitment contacts were targeted to the relevant demographic sectors in order to maintain a fair and representative split of geographies, settings and specialties.

Were the data weighted?

•  Data for the US were weighted by years in practice by gender, region and specialty to be representative of doctors in the US. Data for Australia, Brazil, England and Norway were weighted by age, gender and specialty to be representative of the physician population in each country. Data for Singapore were not weighted as information about the physician population was not available. Questions trended from 2011 (Q705, Q805), however, were not weighted.

Method (cont.)

Demographics


Global Total

(n=2619)

Gender

Male 67%

Female 33%

Age

Under 30 5%

30-39 29%

40-49 28%

50-59 25%

60+ 12%

Physician Type

Primary Care/General Practice/Family Physician 48%

Secondary Care/Specialist 52%

Average # of Years Practicing Medicine 18 yrs.

Average Time Spent Face-to-Face with Patients 74.4%

Doctor Demographics (2015) Global Total

(n=2619)

Organization Status

Public 46%

Private not-for-profit/charitable 9%

Private for profit 44%

Primary Work Setting

Mostly office - or clinic-based 59%

Exclusively hospital - or lab-based 13%

Mostly hospital - or lab-based 13%

Equally hospital-based and office/clinic-based 11%

Mostly long-term care facility-based 1%

Mostly hospice-based 1%

Practice Size (Office or Clinic Based) (n=1852)

Solo practice 18%

Single-specialty partnership or group (2 or more doctors) 42%

Multi-specialty partnership or group (2 or more doctors) 40%

Note: Unweighted Data Base: All Qualified Respondents


Australia Total (n=510)

Gender

Male 71%

Female 29%

Age

Under 30 0%

30-39 15%

40-49 32%

50-59 34%

60+ 19%

Physician Type





Australia Doctor Demographics (2015) Australia

Total (n=510)

Organization Status

Public 27%











Solo practice 20%





Brazil Total (n=504)

Gender

Male 57%

Female 43%

Age

Under 30 11%

30-39 42%

40-49 18%

50-59 21%

60+ 8%

Physician Type





Brazil Doctor Demographics (2015) Brazil Total (n=504)

Organization Status

Public 34%











Solo practice 28%





England Total (n=502)

Gender

Male 66%

Female 34%

Age

Under 30 4%

30-39 38%

40-49 33%

50-59 21%

60+ 5%

Physician Type





England Doctor Demographics (2015) England

Total (n=502)

Organization Status

Public 95%











Solo practice 4%





Norway Total (n=302)

Gender

Male 67%

Female 33%

Age

Under 30 1%

30-39 16%

40-49 34%

50-59 33%

60+ 16%

Physician Type





Norway Doctor Demographics (2015) Norway

Total (n=302)

Organization Status

Public 71%











Solo practice 26%





Singapore Total (n=200)

Gender

Male 77%

Female 24%

Age

Under 30 28%

30-39 39%

40-49 23%

50-59 10%

60+ 2%

Physician Type





Singapore Doctor Demographics (2015) Singapore

Total (n=200)

Organization Status

Public 56%











Solo practice 14%





US Total (n=601)

Gender

Male 68%

Female 32%

Age

Under 30 1%

30-39 27%

40-49 29%

50-59 28%

60+ 15%

Physician Type

Primary Care/General Practice/Family Physician 50% Secondary Care/Specialist 50% Average # of Years Practicing Medicine 16 yrs.


Organization Status

Public 13%



US Doctor Demographics (2015) US

Total (n=601)

Region

East 33%

Midwest 22%

South 27%

West 17%









Solo practice 18%




Research Results: Key Findings


80% 85% 70%

86% 79% 86% 79%

Doctors are more proficient using electronic health records in their clinical practices today than two years ago

“I am more proficient using electronic health records in my clinical practice today than I was two years ago”

Global Total Australia Brazil England Norway Singapore US

Base: All Qualified Respondents Total (n=2619);Australia(n=510);Brazil(n=504);England(n=502);Norway(n=302);Singapore(n=200);US(n=601) Q810 How much do you agree or disagree with the following statements?

Agree Disagree


Routine use of electronic functions and activities

Percent Who Use Routinely (2015)

GLOBAL Australia Brazil England Norway Singapore US Electronically enter patient notes either during or after consultations 72% 70% 61% 68% 97% 45% 82% Receive clinical results electronically that populate my patients’ EMR 57% 72% 24% 70% 58% 42% 65% Electronic access to clinical data about a patient who has been seen by a different health organization

51% 55% 27% 66% 64% 46% 51%

Electronic tools to reduce the administrative burden for delivering healthcare

49% 63% 38% 40% 33% 49% 63%

Electronically send order requests to laboratories 44% 16% 19% 61% 68% 43% 62% Receive electronic alerts/reminders while I am seeing my patients 43% 54% 16% 55% 39% 40% 50% Electronically send prescriptions to pharmacies (e-Prescribing) 36% 10% 9% 30% 54% 45% 72% Electronic referrals to/from health professionals in other organizations 34% 22% 9% 41% 72% 25% 43% Use computerized clinical decision support systems 28% 25% 24% 28% 27% 28% 34% Electronically notified of my patients’ interactions with other health organizations

27% 32% 6% 41% 28% 21% 32%

Communicate electronically with clinicians in other organizations 26% 24% 18% 38% 21% 19% 31% Communicate electronically with patients (e.g., via secure email) 16% 8% 23% 7% 10% 12% 30%

Base: All Qualified Respondents Total(n=2619);Australia(n=510);Brazil(n=504);England((n=502);Norway(n=302);Singapore(n=200);US(n=601) Note: Unweighted Data. Q705. How frequently do you use/perform the following functions/activities?


Routine use of electronic functions increased since 2012

*Note: Trended data are not available for Brazil and Norway, as this is the first year collecting data in these countries. Base: All Qualified Respondents Australia (2015 n=510, 2012 n=500); England (2015 n=502, 2012 n=500); Singapore (2015 n=200, 2012 n=200);US (2015 n=601, 2012 n=500), Unweighted Data Q705. How frequently do you use/perform the following functions/activities?

Routine Use of Electronic Functions 2012 and 2015*

Electronic patient notes

Electronic clinical results to automatically populate EMR

Electronic access to external clinical data about a patient

Electronic tools to reduce the administrative burden for delivering healthcare

Electronically send order requests to laboratories

Receive electronic alerts/reminders while I am seeing my patients

Electronically send prescriptions to pharmacies (e-Prescribing)

Electronic referrals to/from health professionals in other organizations

Use computerized clinical decision support systems

Electronically notified of my patients’ interactions with other health organizations

Communicate electronically with clinicians in other organizations

Communicate electronically with patients (e.g., via secure email)

2012 2015 Percent Change

64% 70% +9%

67% 72% +7%

42% 55% +31%

50% 63% +26%

12% 16% +33%

44% 54% +23%

6% 10% +67%

15% 22% +47%

15% 25% +67%

20% 32% +60%

13% 24% +85%

5% 8% +60%


64% 68% +6%

60% 70% +17%

54% 66% +22%

29% 40% +38%

46% 61% +33%

46% 55% +20%

12% 30% +150%

33% 41% +24%

24% 28% +17%

29% 41% +41%

31% 38% +23%

6% 7% +17%


52% 45% -13%

49% 42% -14%

49% 46% -6%

57% 49% -14%

56% 43% -23%

35% 40% +14%

49% 45% -8%

21% 25% +19%

26% 28% +8%

19% 21% +11%

29% 19% -34%

19% 12% -37%


78% 82% +5%

62% 65% +5%

45% 51% +13%

55% 63% +15%

57% 62% +9%

45% 50% +11%

65% 72% +11%

32% 43% +34%

24% 34% +42%

19% 32% +68%

23% 31% +35%

13% 30% +131%

Ranked on 2015 global total


Services available to patients electronically

Percent with service available to their patients (2015)

GLOBAL Australia Brazil England Norway Singapore US Receive reminders when it is time for preventative or follow up care 41% 43% 43% 30% 28% 58% 47%

Communicate with you through secure email 41% 40% 55% 30% 15% 43% 52%

Book/change/cancel appointments 37% 18% 39% 43% 36% 58% 41%

Request prescription refills 34% 16% 28% 36% 33% 40% 53%

Access health information to help them manage their conditions 32% 26% 30% 30% 20% 40% 45%

View health-related information during consultation 31% 34% 32% 24% 26% 42% 31%

Access their medical information 27% 13% 24% 12% 39% 28% 49% Download an electronic summary of their medical records 19% 10% 19% 10% 5% 30% 39%

View personal /family member’s test results on secure website 19% 6% 26% 7% 8% 24% 38%

Use tele-monitoring devices to monitor/record their health indicators 16% 11% 23% 11% 3% 28% 21%

Review patient chart 16% 8% 12% 8% 13% 31% 30% Communicate with you through video conferencing 13% 20% 19% 5% 2% 16% 12%

Base: All Qualified Respondents (Reduced Base, Excludes Don’t Know) Total(n=2619);Australia(n=510);Brazil(n=504);England(n=502);Norway(n=302);Singapore(n=200);US(n=601) Q925/Q740. Are the following functions available to your patients electronically? Can they (...)?


More doctors are reporting availability of electronic services for their patients compared with 2012

*Note: Trended data are not available for Brazil and Norway, as this is the first year collecting data in these countries. Base: All Qualified Respondents Australia (2015 n=510, 2012 n=500); England (2015 n=502, 2012 n=500); Singapore (2015 n=200, 2012 n=200);US (2015 n=601, 2012 n=500), Q925/Q740. Are the following functions available to your patients electronically? Can they (...)?

Services Available to Patients Electronically 2012 and 2015*

Receive reminders when it is time for preventative or follow up care

Communicate with you through secure email

Book/change/cancel appointments

Request prescription refills

Access health information to help them manage their conditions

View health-related information during consultation

Access their medical information

Download an electronic summary of their medical records

View personal /family member’s test results on secure website

Use tele-monitoring devices to monitor/record their health indicators

Review patient chart

Communicate with you through video conferencing


26% 43% +65%

33% 40% +21%

14% 18% +29%

12% 16% +33%

27% 26% -4%

29% 34% +17%

7% 13% +86%

7% 10% +43%

3% 6% +100%

4% 11% +175%

7% 8% +14%

21% 20% -5%


26% 30% +15%

32% 30% -6%

37% 43% +16%

30% 36% +20%

36% 30% -17%

27% 24% -11%

10% 12% +20%

9% 10% +11%

4% 7% +75%

9% 11% +22%

8% 8% 0%

2% 5% +150%


58% 58% 0%

45% 43% -4%

57% 58% +2%

33% 40% +21%

43% 40% -7%

42% 42% 0%

29% 28% -3%

19% 30% +58%

18% 24% +33%

19% 28% +47%

24% 31% +29%

21% 16% -24%


36% 55% +53%

41% 56% +37%

31% 46% +48%

43% 58% +35%

37% 53% +43%

27% 36% +33%

30% 55% +83%

24% 46% +92%

23% 42% +83%

8% 24% +200%

24% 33% +38%

6% 14% +133%

Ranked on 2015 global total


Doctors say that patient updating of EHR’s helps patient satisfaction, engagement, understanding, and communication

GLOBAL Australia Brazil England Norway Singapore US

Patient satisfaction 84% 84% 87% 86% 83% 79% 81%

Patient engagement 82% 78% 83% 88% 69% 87% 82%

Understanding of health condition 71% 66% 69% 78% 62% 78% 72%

Patient/Physician communication 69% 64% 75% 70% 63% 67% 71%

Accuracy of records 54% 46% 56% 55% 48% 56% 60%

Patient Updating of EHR Helps…

Base: All Qualified Respondents Total (n=2619); Australia (n=510);Brazil (n=504);England (n=502);Norway (n=302);Singapore (n=200);US (n=601) Q930 When you allow a patient to update his or her electronic medical record, does it help or hurt the following?


Some doctors say patient updating of EHR hurts accuracy of records

GLOBAL Australia Brazil England Norway Singapore US

Accuracy of records 46% 54% 44% 45% 52% 44% 40%

Patient/Physician communication 31% 36% 25% 30% 37% 34% 29%

Understanding of health condition 29% 34% 31% 22% 38% 22% 28%

Patient engagement 18% 22% 17% 12% 31% 14% 18%

Patient satisfaction 16% 16% 13% 14% 17% 22% 19%

Patient Updating of EHR Hurts…

Base: All Qualified Respondents Total (n=2619); Australia (n=510);Brazil (n=504);England (n=502);Norway (n=302);Singapore (n=200);US (n=601) Q930 When you allow a patient to update his or her electronic medical record, does it help or hurt the following?


49% 47% 45% 47% 46% 42% 58%

Some doctors find their organizations’ electronic health records systems hard to use

“The electronic health records system in my organization is hard to use”


Base: All Qualified Respondents Total(n=2619);Australia(n=510);Brazil(n=504);England((n=502);Norway(n=302);Singapore(n=200);US(n=601) Q810 How much do you agree or disagree with the following statements?

Agree Disagree


58% 45%

63% 55% 56% 45%

71%

42% 55%

37% 45% 44% 56%

29%

According to doctors, healthcare IT has decreased time with patients

The use of healthcare IT has…


Increased the amount of time spent with patients Decreased the amount of time spent with patients

Base: All Qualified Respondents Total(n=2619);Australia(n=510);Brazil(n=504);England((n=502);Norway(n=302);Singapore(n=200);US(n=601) Q735 Has the use of healthcare IT…


Most doctors see positive impact of EMR and HIE on the quality of treatment decisions

6% 3% 5% 1% 1% 3% 3% 4% 3% 4% 16%

21% 27% 20%

10% 20% 19% 17% 14% 12%

30%

38%

74% 70% 76% 90%

79% 77% 79% 83% 85%

62%

46%

2015 2012 2015 2015 2012 2015 2015 2012 2015 2012 2015

Impact of EMR and HIE: Improved quality of treatment decisions


Note: Trended data are not available for Brazil and Norway, as this is the first year collecting data in these countries. Base: All Qualified Respondents (Reduced Base, Excludes Don’t Knows), Unweighted Data Q805. To what extent is the use of electronic medical records and health information exchange (HIE) enabling the following benefits?

Impacts positively No impact Impacts negatively


Most doctors see positive impact of EMR and HIE on health outcomes for patients

23% 25% 20%

8% 21% 19% 27% 23% 18%

32%

40%

72% 72% 76% 92%

76% 78% 71% 74% 80%

58% 46%

2015 2012 2015 2015 2012 2015 2015 2012 2015 2012 2015

Impact of EMR and HIE: Improved health outcomes for patients





Most doctors say EMR and HIE have had a positive impact on reducing medical errors

16% 19% 15% 14% 19% 13% 17% 13%

7% 19%

23%

78% 77% 80% 85% 79% 83% 78% 78% 88%

72% 64%

2015 2012 2015 2015 2012 2015 2015 2012 2015 2012 2015

Impact of EMR and HIE: Reduction in Medical Errors




doctors survey 2015 six-country report · 2015-10-07 · doctors include specialists in a number of...

Documents