Although electronic health records (EHRs) have many benefits, studies reveal unexpected patient safety and liability risks associated with their use. The speed at which EHR technology is advancing and the speed with which hospitals and medical practices are implementing these systems can partially explain this increased risk exposure.1 Optimizing an EHR (using it to its full potential) can deflect some of this risk. However, the importance of optimizing an EHR can be overlooked amid the struggle to provide quality patient care while complying with regulations and participating in government incentive programs.2
A medical record serves many purposes. In addition to communicating medical information and providing proof of services rendered for billing, medical records are a primary means of showing compliance with the standard of care in medical malpractice litigation.3 One of the more difficult issues for defense attorneys to overcome in malpractice litigation is a medical record that cannot be confidently presented to a jury as evidence of appropriate medical care. EHR “efficiency tools” (such as copy/paste, cloning and templates) have added new twists to old documentation problems (e.g., using templates that default to normal is similar to documenting by exception) and has created entirely new challenges (e.g., uncorrected pasted text in a wrong patient’s medical record). Some documentation problems persist no matter the medical record format (e.g., late additions and corrections).
The NORCAL best practices and closed claims case studies linked below illustrate how EHR optimization and ensuring the proper use of EHR efficiency tools can increase patient safety and decrease malpractice liability risk.
Copying and pasting, pulling forward and using templates that generate pre-composed text are forms of “cloning.” Cloning functions are sometimes referred to as “efficiency tools.”4 Efficiency tools may speed up the documentation process, but if their use creates unnecessarily redundant or inaccurate medical record information, they not only can increase professional liability and billing fraud risk, but also can jeopardize patient safety by disrupting physician communication.5
For example, a record created by efficiency tools may include:
Some cloning-generated inaccuracies and irregularities are obvious, but less obvious cloned medical record documentation can be equally damaging in malpractice litigation. There will undoubtedly be a problem with the defense of care when a physician would have to answer “No,” or “I can’t be sure,” to the question “Did you actually provide the services documented in this note?” The integrity of EHR information is vital to the defense of a malpractice claim. Plaintiffs’ attorneys are known to capitalize on problematic medical records by alleging patient information has been willfully obscured or withheld, is missing or has been destroyed. Allegations such as these undermine the credibility of a physician in the eyes of a jury and can persuade the jury to side with the patient, even when the medical care is appropriate.3
For evidentiary purposes in a medical malpractice case, the medical record, which is usually presented as a printout, should tell a compelling story about the physician’s excellent care of the patient and should reflect the physician’s professionalism, medical knowledge and empathy. It is possible to create this type of record using cloning, but cloning techniques must be used sparingly and thoughtfully. A record that stands up in litigation will also have qualities that promote patient safety and reduce the risk of Medicare billing fraud.
Different types of cloning can cause different patient safety, litigation and billing issues. Sometimes a single record may include various forms of cloned text. In the end, how the cloning is defined matters less than what it has created. The following descriptions are provided for clarity.
Copy/Paste Cloning in Electronic Health Records
Moving text around in medical records is a widespread practice among physicians and other clinicians. A study conducted in a teaching hospital’s intensive care unit found that at least 20 percent of the progress notes had been copied and pasted in 82 percent of residents’ notes and 74 percent of attending physicians’ notes. These findings of pervasive copying and pasting were consistent with earlier studies.5 “Pulling forward” is a type of copying and pasting. It is generally used to describe copying and pasting within a single patient’s record. In other words, the patient’s prior medical information becomes part of a new record. For example, a physician can pull forward parts of (or an entire) progress note from the patient’s prior examination. Some programs automatically update various aspects of pulled-forward content, such as blood pressure, labs and medications.
Templates in Electronic Health Records
Templates are documentation tools that collect, organize and present clinical data. Many EHR systems are organized around templates for specific types of examinations or for patients of certain ages or with certain conditions. Templates generally use dropdown menus indicating normal or abnormal values or observations. A series of mouse clicks can create paragraphs of text that will appear in printed documents. How templates function “out-of-the-box” and the degree to which they can be customized varies widely.
Cloning is not inherently bad. However, cloning functions can be difficult to use in a way that improves patient safety, creates accurate and unique patient encounter documentation and complies with Medicare billing laws. Consider the following medical liability risk management recommendations to minimize cloning risks:3,4,5,6,7,8
For many reasons, development of EHR documentation expertise should be considered an ongoing endeavor. Establishing EHR documentation expertise may take a significant amount of time at the beginning, but it can save considerable time in the long run.
1. Sittig DF, Singh H. “Electronic Health Records and National Patient-Safety Goals.” N Engl J Med 2012; 367:1854-1860. (accessed 10/15/2020).
2. Success EHS. 10 Things to Do After EHR Implementation.
3. Dimick C. “EHRs Prove a Difficult Witness in Court.” Journal of AHIMA. 2010 June 24. (accessed 10/15/2020)
4. AHIMA. “Integrity of the Healthcare Record: Best Practices for EHR Documentation.” Journal of AHIMA. 2013;84(8): 58-62. (accessed 10/15/2020)
5. Bowman S. “Impact of Electronic Health Record Systems on Information Integrity: Quality and Safety Implications.” Perspect Health Inf Manag. 2013 Fall; 10:1c. (accessed 10/15/2020)
6. Cueva JP. “EMR Cloning: A Bad Habit. Convenient Computer Function may Prompt Patient Care concerns, payment denials and legal questions.” Chicago Medical Society News. (accessed 10/15/2020)
7. The Joint Commission. “Sentinel Event Alert 54: Safe Use of Health Information Technology.” 2015 Mar 31. (accessed 10/15/2020)
8. Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. Program Integrity Issues in Electronic Health Records: An Overview. June 2016. (accessed 11/3/2020)