Skip to main content
Dryad

Does autotext usage decrease documentation time among resident physicians? A retrospective analysis of EHR usage data

Data files

Jun 26, 2025 version files 6.40 KB

Abstract

Objective

Usage of autotext or “dotphrases” is ubiquitous among provider workflows in electronic health records (EHRs). Yet little is known about the impact of these tools in inpatient settings and among resident physicians. We aimed to evaluate the association between autotext usage and documentation time among resident physicians in an academic medical center using the Cerner® EHR.

Dataset Description

The association between auto text executions and documentation time per patient seen for 705 resident physicians rotating at a large academic medical center from July 2021 to June 2023 was analyzed via linear regression after controlling for specialty, post-graduate year (PGY), provider gender, and patient volume.

NOTE: The dataset in this study cannot be shared publicly due to the risk of identifying subjects who constitute a vulnerable population and may be known personally to members of the research community (physicians in training). Inclusion of details of gender, department, and year in training, which pose a risk of allowing subjects to be identified, is integral to the analysis of the data, so the data cannot be published in a meaningful form without these details. Accordingly, a short sample dataset that retains the data structure but with randomly generated values that mimic the actual data is provided instead. 

The dataset used in this study was prepared from raw data downloaded from the Cerner Lightson and Cerner Advance toolkits and aggregated at the level of an individual resident physician over an academic year. As the study covers two academic years, 2021-2022 and 2022-2023, there are two entries for some resident physicians who were at the institution during both academic years.  The dataset includes a randomly generated anonymous identifier for each provider, as well as demographics on department, gender, and PGY, and data on autotext usage, patient volume, documentation time per patient seen, and total EHR time per patient seen.

Results

There was no significant overall association between autotext executions per patient seen and documentation time per patient seen in specialties using Dynamic Documentation as their primary workflow (β=-0.1 min per autotext execution per patient seen, 95% CI -0.6 to 0.5 min, p=0.79). However, there was increased documentation time among residents with no autotext usage compared to residents who used autotext, and this effect was mediated by the use of personalized autotexts. Specialty, PGY, gender, and patient volume were significant determinants of documentation time.

Discussion

Efforts to decrease documentation time among resident physicians should encourage autotext adoption but should not be focused on the promotion of autotext usage alone. Further research should address the questions of identifying other determinants of documentation time, autotext design standards, and how autotext usage affects measures of note quality.

Conclusion

Autotext adoption decreases documentation time among resident physicians, but among those who adopt autotext, higher levels of usage show no benefit.