Comparing "Meaningful Use" of Health Information Technology in Pennsylvania: Electronic Prescription Rates of Metropolitan and Rural Counties.

Abstract

The Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health Act incentivized the adoption of electronic health records (EHRs). Health systems looked to leverage technology to assist in serving populations in health professional shortage areas. Qualitative research points to EHR usability as a source of health inequities in rural settings, making the challenges of EHR usage a subject of interest. Pennsylvania offers a model for investigating rural health infrastructure with it having the third largest rural population in the United States. This study analyzed the adoption of Electronic Prescribing in the 67 Pennsylvania (PA) counties. Physician adoption and usage data for PA and the United States were compared using a t-test to establish a basis for comparison. PA counties were categorized using the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA)'s Rural-Urban Commuting Areas (RUCAs) system. Surescript use percentages were plotted against the RUCA scores of each PA county to create a polynomial regression model. PA office-based physicians, on average, utilize e-prescription tools at the same rate as the national average with 59% of practices utilizing Surescripts as of 2013. There was no significant correlation between Surescript usage and the rural/urban classification of counties in Pennsylvania (R-squared value of 0.06). Pennsylvania was able to adopt health information technology (HIT) infrastructure at the same rate as the national average. Rural and metropolitan definitions do not correlate to meaningful use of HIT, thus usability of HIT cannot be tied to health outcomes. Future studies looking at specific forms of HIT and their ability to decrease the burden of administrative work for clinicians.