Cited by 238Healthcare cost, quality, practicesHealthcare Policy and ManagementElectronic Health Records Systems

Putting Patients First by Reducing Administrative Tasks in Health Care: A Position Paper of the American College of Physicians

Erickson, Shari M., Rockwern, Brooke, Koltov, Michelle, McLean, Robert M., for the Medical Practice and Quality Committee of the American College of Physicians*·2017·Annals of Internal Medicine

Abstract

This American College of Physicians (ACP) position paper, initiated and written by ACP's Medical Practice and Quality Committee and approved by the Board of Regents on 21 January 2017, reports policy recommendations to address the issue of administrative tasks to mitigate or eliminate their adverse effects on physicians, their patients, and the health care system as a whole. The paper outlines a cohesive framework for analyzing administrative tasks through several lenses to better understand any given task that a clinician and his or her staff may be required to perform. In addition, a scoping literature review and environmental scan were done to assess the effects on physician time, practice and system cost, and patient care due to the increase in administrative tasks. The findings from the scoping review, in addition to the framework, provide the backbone of detailed policy recommendations from the ACP to external stakeholders (such as payers, governmental oversight organizations, and vendors) regarding how any given administrative requirement, regulation, or program should be assessed, then potentially revised or removed entirely.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.7326/m16-2697

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 47 · Cited by 238

Authors
Erickson, S. M., Rockwern, B., Koltov, M., McLean, R. M., & for the Medical Practice and Quality Committee of the American College of Physicians*
Affiliations
American College of Physicians (US)
Venue
Annals of Internal Medicine
Published
2017-05-02
Volume
166
Issue
9
Pages
659-661
ISSN
  • 0003-4819 (ISSN-L)
  • 1539-3704
OpenAlex
W2598272139
Cited by
238
References
47
Citations by year
2026: 14 · 2025: 21 · 2024: 19 · 2023: 29 · 2022: 28 · 2021: 25 · 2020: 30 · 2019: 27 · 2018: 26 · 2017: 19
FWCI
45.22
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Annals of Internal Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Healthcare cost, quality, practices
  • Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Healthcare Policy and Management
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Health Information Management › Electronic Health Records Systems
Keywords
administrative burden, physician time, administrative functions, health policy, patient-centered care, practice expenses, health care costs, quality of care, regulatory burden, physician workload, policy recommendations
MeSH terms
Delivery of Health Care, Health Policy, Humans, Practice Management, Medical, United States

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