eAppendix Table 2.
Descriptive Characteristics of Ambulatory Care Practices Defined as Super-users of EHR-Based HIT Functionalities
| Super-user (%) | p | Total (%) | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 8003 (26.6) | 30123 | |||
| Median, mean | 3,9.2 | < 0.0001 | 2,5.6 | |
| Size (number of associated physicians) | < 7 | 5303 (66.3) | < 0.0001 | 23324 (77.4) |
| 7–19 | 1146 (14.3) | 3415 (11.3) | ||
| 20–99 | 487 (6.1) | 1222 (4.1) | ||
| >100 | 1067 (13.3) | 2162 (7.2) | ||
| Practice Type | Primary | 2458 (30.7) | <0.0001 | 9289 (30.8) |
| Single or multiple specialty, allied health | 5116 (63.9) | 18823 (62.5) | ||
| Specialist services and urgent care | 429 (5.4) | 2011 (6.7) | ||
| Location | Rural | 222 (2.8) | <0.0001 | 1402 (4.7) |
| Small town | 355 (4.5) | 2234 (7.4) | ||
| Mid-size | 590 (7.4) | 3933 (13.1) | ||
| Metropolitan | 6833 (85.4) | 22518 (74.8) | ||
| Region | Northeast | 1310 (16.4) | <0.0001 | 6141 (20.4) |
| Midwest | 3264 (40.8) | 9756 (32.4) | ||
| South | 2496 (31.2) | 9767 (32.4) | ||
| West | 933 (11.7) | 4459 (14.8) |
P values calculated with Pearson’s χ2 for categorical variables, they estimate the statistical significance of differences in proportions between categories of practice variables in super-use practices compared to the total sample. Two-sided t test performed to test significance of difference in mean number of associated physicians. The analysis for the location excludes 36 practices which did not have an accurate zip code-rurality crosswalk.