Putting Patients First by Reducing Administrative Tasks in Health Care: A Position Paper of the American College of Physicians
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
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
Prior reviews have demonstrated that administrative tasks contribute substantially to staff workload and time pressure.
“Prior reviews26 have demonstrated that administrative tasks contribute substantially to staff workload and time pressure.”
From Artificial intelligence: opportunities and implications for the health workforce (2020) · cites this paper as [26]
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
- Publisher
- American College of Physicians
- 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