{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.03481720964934096, 'fraction_numerical': 0.020890325789604577, 'mean_word_length': 5.313971742543171, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 1, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Gender Differences in Time Spent on Documentation and the Electronic Health Record in a Large Ambulatory Network

This cross-sectional study assesses gender differences in time spent on documentation and electronic health records in a large ambulatory care network.


Introduction
Electronic health records (EHRs) have transformed physician work and work experiences. Although there are known positive effects of EHRs on clinical outcomes, 1 EHRs have also been associated with clinician burnout. 2 Prior work has demonstrated higher rates of burnout among women physicians. 3 We sought to characterize gender differences associated with time spent on the EHR and the specific EHR activities associated with these differences.

Methods
This cross-sectional study was deemed exempt from review and informed consent by the Yale University institutional review board because it used deidentified data and did not involve human participants. This study followed the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) reporting guideline.
This was a retrospective cross-sectional study of EHR use in a large, New England ambulatory practice network. Data for EHR use by nontrainee, ambulatory physicians between February 2018

Results
Complete data were available for 318 physicians (95% of potential sample); 194 physicians (61.0%) were men and 124 physicians (39.0%) were women, and 231 physicians (72.6%) were aged 45 years or older. More than half the sample was primary care physicians (173 physicians [54.4%]); 103 physicians (32.3%) were medical specialists, and 42 physicians (13.2%) were surgical specialists (Table). Women physicians were younger, more represented in primary care specialties, and cared for significantly fewer patients per hour and month (Table).
In unadjusted analyses, women physicians, compared with men, had higher EHR-  (Table).
Mean adjusted WOW 8 was 9.6 (95% CI, 9.1-10.1) minutes greater for women vs men physicians (P = .04), while mean adjusted Note-Time 8 was 31.0 (95% CI, 15.4-49.5) minutes greater for women physicians (P < .001). This translated to the following mean (SD) adjusted times for women vs men: Values are calculated per 8 hours of scheduled patient time.

Discussion
In this cross-sectional study across ambulatory specialties, we demonstrated that female physicians spend more time on the EHR overall, after-hours, and on EHR-based documentation than male physicians. Clinical documentation is the primary activity driving gender differences in EHR time.
These differences persisted after accounting for hours worked, physician specialty, and other characteristics, despite female physicians caring for slightly fewer patients on average.
Our findings provide a potential mechanism for the gender gap in burnout, 3 which has implications for workforce mental health 5 and physician retention. 6 They suggest that women physicians may benefit from policy changes, workflows, and technologies that reduce documentation burden, including scribes, team documentation, and artificial intelligence-powered solutions.
Strengths of our study include the examination of EHR use patterns from a large, multispecialty ambulatory care network and the availability of detailed demographic, productivity, and EHR use information. Limitations include derivation of data from a single, nonteaching practice network and availability of data only from prior to December 2019. Future studies should characterize workflow and technology interventions that can reduce time spent on the EHR, with focus on interventions that reduce documentation burden.
Role of the Funder/Sponsor: The funder had no role in the design and conduct of the study; collection, management, analysis, and interpretation of the data; preparation, review, or approval of the manuscript; and decision to submit the manuscript for publication.

Disclaimer:
The opinions expressed in this article are those of the authors and should not be interpreted as American Medical Association policy.