Cited by 223Electronic Health Records SystemsHealthcare professionals’ stress and burnoutTechnostress in Professional Settings

Burnout Related to Electronic Health Record Use in Primary Care

Open access
Budd, Jeffrey·2023·Journal of Primary Care & Community Health

Abstract

Physician burnout has been increasing in the United States, especially in primary care, and the use of Electronic Health Records (EHRs) is a prominent contributor. This review article summarizes findings from a PubMed literature search that shows the significant contributors to EHR-related burnout may be documentation and clerical burdens, complex usability, electronic messaging and inbox, cognitive load, and time demands. Documentation requirements have escalated and have inherently changed from paper-based records. Many clerical tasks have also shifted to become additional physician responsibilities. When considering factors of efficiency, effectiveness, and user satisfaction, EHRs overall have an inferior usability score when compared to other technologies. The volume and organization of data along with alerts and complex interfaces require a substantial cognitive load and result in cognitive fatigue. Patient interactions and work-life balances are negatively affected by the time requirements of EHR tasks during and after clinic hours. Patient portals and EHR messaging have created a separate source of patient care outside of face-to-face visits that is often unaccounted productivity and not reimbursable.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/21501319231166921

Cites

46 of 46 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Cognitive load must be managed for effective problem-solving and clinical decision-making, as levels of cognitive load influence decisions and outcomes.

    “Cognitive load must be managed for effective problem-solving and clinical decision-making (correct decisions/reduction of errors), as levels of cognitive load influence decisions and outcomes38,49–53.”

    From When better data meets better design: How EHR data usability and system usability shape physicians' cognitive load (2026) · cites this paper as [53]

    The Results section (‘Cognitive Load’; page not supplied) says EHR information overload can obscure critical clinical information and that processing alerts places cognitive demands on clinical decisions. It does not establish that managing cognitive load improves problem-solving or reduces errors, or that different load levels determine decisions and outcomes. (LLM, conf=0.83)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Administrative tasks, including reviewing and responding to EHR inbox messages, are often time consuming and not reimbursable, and have been linked to clinician burnout, especially among female providers.

    “Administrative tasks, including reviewing and responding to EHR inbox messages from patients, are often time consuming and not reimbursable, and have been linked to clinician burnout, 33 especially among female providers.”

    From Wearable Devices, Health Care Use, and Psychological Well-Being in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation (2024) · cites this paper as [33]

    The Results section, “Electronic Messaging and Inbox” (page unavailable), describes inbox work as burdensome, typically unreimbursed, and associated with burnout. The provided passages and searches for female providers and gender do not support the claim that the association is especially strong among female providers. (LLM, conf=0.87)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

1 retracted

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. [14]Berg S. Simpler logins, voice recognition ease click fatigue at Yale. AMA Digital. 2018. Accessed August 5, 2022. https://www.ama-assn.org/practice-management/digital/simpler-logins-voice-recognition-ease-click-fatigue-yale

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Budd, J.
Affiliations
University of Florida Health (US)
Corresponding author
Budd, Jeffrey
Venue
Journal of Primary Care & Community Health
Published
2023-01
Volume
14
Pages
21501319231166921-21501319231166921
ISSN
  • 2150-1319 (ISSN-L)
  • 2150-1327
OpenAlex
W4366350958
Cited by
223
References
46
Citations by year
2026: 80 · 2025: 85 · 2024: 51 · 2023: 7
FWCI
8.74
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Primary Care & Community Health (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Health Information Management › Electronic Health Records Systems
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Healthcare professionals’ stress and burnout
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Technostress in Professional Settings
Keywords
physician burnout, electronic health records, primary care, clinical documentation burden, clerical work, EHR usability, cognitive load, mental fatigue, patient portals, work-life balance, productivity, reimbursement
MeSH terms
Burnout, Professional, Documentation, Humans, Physicians, Primary Health Care, United States, Electronic Health Records

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review