An official website of the United States government

Here’s how you know

Official websites use .gov
A .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.

Secure .gov websites use HTTPS
A lock ( ) or https:// means you’ve safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

ASTP Logo
Skip Navigation
  • Topics
      • Featured
        • Featured

        • Certification of Health IT

          Ensures health IT meets standards for functionality, security, and interoperability.

        • Information Blocking

          Regulations ensuring health data is shared appropriately without improper barriers.

        • Interoperability

          Enables secure and seamless exchange of electronic health information among authorized users.

        • Health Information Technology Advisory Committee (HITAC)

          Advises on policies, standards, and implementation specifications for health data and technology.

        • United States Core Data for Interoperability (USCDI)

          Offers a standardized set of health data classes and constituent data elements for nationwide, interoperable health information exchange.

        • Trusted Exchange Framework & Common Agreement (TEFCA)

          Operates as a nationwide framework for the interoperability of electronic health information.

      • Artificial Intelligence
        • Artificial Intelligence

        • Artificial Intelligence (AI) at HHS

          HHS’ list of AI use cases is publicly available to search and reference. In addition to AI use case summaries, the inventory also includes information on data, IT infrastructure, internal governance, and much more.

      • Care Continuum
        • Care Continuum

          Explore the roles of health information and technology in broad healthcare settings, supporting seamless, coordinated patient care from prevention through recovery.

        • Care Settings

        • Behavioral Health

          Health information, policies, and technology supporting integrated care for mental health and substance use disorders.

        • Emergency Medical Services

          Rapid response and communication during health emergencies through health information and technology.

        • Long-Term & Post-Acute Care

          Health information and technology facilitating coordinated care beyond acute settings.

        • Maternal & Pediatric Care

          Technology addressing unique health needs of mothers and children.

        • Pharmacy & PDMP

          Electronic tools tracking controlled substance prescriptions to improve patient safety.

        • Public Health

          Using health information and technology to prevent disease, diagnose health conditions, and promote population health.

        • Clinical Topics

        • Clinical Quality & Safety

          Optimal care through measuring results, prioritizing improvements, and implementing and monitoring results.

        • Usability & Provider Burden

          Promotes health information and technology usability to reduce clinician burden and enhance patient care.

      • Interoperability
        • Interoperability

          Promotes standardized exchange and use of electronic health data to improve patient care, coordination, and public health outcomes.

        • Health IT Interoperability

          Enables secure and seamless exchange of electronic health information among authorized users.

        • Trusted Exchange Framework & Common Agreement (TEFCA)

          Facilitates secure, nationwide electronic health information sharing to connect providers, patients, public health agencies, and payers.

        • Certification of Health IT

          Provides certification criteria for developers of health IT modules that ensures health IT products meet the standards for functionality, security, and interoperability.

        • Standards & Technology

          Advance healthcare quality and safety through standardized health IT and secure health data exchange.

        • Information Blocking

          Prevents practices that interfere with the access, exchange, or use of electronic health information, as defined by the Cures Act.

        • Interoperability Standards Platform

          Serves as a homepage for tools and resources for understanding and using health IT standards and technologies.

        • Investments

          Support interoperability improvements nationwide.

        • Health IT & Health Information Exchange Basics

          Enable secure electronic sharing and access of patient health information, supporting healthcare providers and patients across care settings.

        • Patient Access to Health Records

          Ensure patients have secure and convenient access to their health records, supported by healthcare providers and health IT developers under HIPAA.

      • Policy
          • Policy

            Outlines federal regulations and strategic initiatives guiding effective use and secure exchange of electronic health information.

            • Legislation

              Delivers improvements in the delivery and experience of health care while enhancing health outcomes by leveraging health information technology.

            • Regulations

              Supports the adoption and promotion of standards-based health information.

            • TEFCA

              Operates as a nationwide framework for the interoperability of electronic health information.

            • HHS Health IT Alignment Program

              Coordinates health data and technology initiatives across HHS to enhance interoperability and effectiveness.

            • Health Information Technology Advisory Committee (HITAC)

              Advises on policies, standards, and implementation specifications for health data and technology.

            • Privacy & Security

              Protects electronic health information security through policy.

          • Rulemaking

          • HTI Rules

            Health data interoperability regulations ensuring secure, effective technology use.

          • Information Blocking

            Policies to prevent practices interfering with the access, exchange, and use of electronic health information.

          • Certification Program Rules

            Ensures health IT meets standards for functionality, security, and interoperability.

      • Research & Analysis
        • Research & Analysis

          Interactive datasets related to health IT data analysis, providing insights into adoption and use.

        • Dashboards

          Gives data-driven insight on how dashboards are driving health IT adoption and how they have helped users to meet federal healthcare incentives or programs.

        • Data Briefs

          Provides health IT adoption and use statistics derived from surveys and administrative data and in-depth analysis of health IT policies and programs.

        • Datasets

          Grants access to raw datasets from ASTP related to health IT adoption, health IT capabilities and other topics.

        • Quick Stats

          Streamlines data into visualizations of key data and summarizes the latest statistics, facts and figures about health IT.

        • About Health IT Research & Analysis

          Provides information about how health IT data are collected, analyzed, and published.

  • Resources & Tools
      • Featured
        • Featured Resources & Tools

          Highlights key tools and guidance supporting effective health IT implementation, interoperability, patient engagement, and compliance with federal standards.

        • Interoperability Standards

          ASTP’s initiatives in health data standards enable secure electronic health data exchange.

        • TEFCA Resources

          Data sheets, videos, and documents to guide users of the TEFCA framework and exchange.

        • Implementation Resources

          Technical resources and tools supporting healthcare providers, clinicians, and developers of health IT products.

        • Health IT Playbook

          Strategies, recommendations, and best practices for implementing and using health data and technology.

        • Security Risk Assessment Tool

          Desktop application supporting providers conducting HIPAA security risk assessments.

        • Patient Engagement Playbook

          Practical reference tool for clinicians, staff, and other innovators around the world to improve patient engagement.

        • Certified Health IT Product List (CHPL)

          A comprehensive and authoritative listing of successfully tested and certified health IT modules.

        • Conformance Test Tools & Edge Testing Tool

          Resources for developers implementing standards to enable health information interoperability.

        • Health IT Feedback Form

          Users can submit feedback regarding health data and technology usability, interoperability, and compliance issues.

      • Resources
        • Resources

          Collection of practical materials, videos, educational tools, and user guides designed to support successful implementation and adoption of health IT systems.

        • Get It, Check It, Use It Guide

          A guide for patients and caregivers who want to access, review, and use their health records.

        • Video Resources

          A repository of informational videos created by ASTP.

        • Health IT Curriculum Resources for Educators

          Instructional materials to help healthcare workers stay current in the changing healthcare environment and deliver care more effectively.

        • Fact Sheets

          A repository of fact sheets created by ASTP.

      • Tools & Technology
          • Implementation

          • Certified Health IT Product List

            A comprehensive and authoritative listing of successfully tested and certified health IT modules.

          • Electronic Clinical Quality Improvement Resource Center

            Provides common standards and shared technologies to monitor and analyze the quality of health care and patient outcomes.

          • Security Risk Assessment Tool

            Desktop application supporting providers conducting HIPAA security risk assessments.

          • Tools

          • Edge Testing Tool

            A centralized collection of testing tools and resources supporting health IT developers and users fully evaluating specific technical standards.

          • Conformance Test Tools

            ONC-approved conformance resources supporting developers implementing standards to enable health information interoperability.

          • Get It, Check It, Use It Guide

            A guide for patients and caregivers who want to access, review, and use their health records.

          • Quick Links

          • Certification & Testing
          • USCDI
          • USCDI+
          • Interoperability Standards Platform (ISP)
          • FHIR
          • ASTP Standards Bulletins
          • Patient ID & Matching Adopted Standards for HHS
  • News & Events
      • Media Center
      • News
      • Events
      • Featured Blogs & News

      • TEFCA™, America’s National Interoperability Network, Reaches Nearly 500 Million Health Records Exchanged as HHS Leverages Technology and AI to Lower Costs and Reduce Burden

        TEFCA™, America’s National Interoperability Network, Reaches Nearly 500 Million Health Records Exchanged as HHS Leverages Technology and AI to Lower Costs and Reduce Burden

        Source: ASTP/ONC Today, HHS, through the Office of the Assistant Secretary for Technology Policy/Office of the National Coordinator for Health…

        TEFCA’s growing, are you in? Take a look at who’s participating in TEFCA Exchange

        TEFCA’s growing, are you in? Take a look at who’s participating in TEFCA Exchange

        We are pleased to announce that the beta version of an interactive, searchable map for TEFCA™ participation is now available. The map released today is another example of our commitment to transparency.

  • About
      • Overview
        • About ASTP

          Mission, role, and responsibilities of ASTP.

        • Leadership

          Profiles of ASTP’s senior leadership team.

        • History

          Timeline of ASTP’s evolution and key milestones.

        • Budget & Performance

          Financial reports and performance accountability.

        • Investments

          Strategic investments in programs, policies, and technology.

        • Reports to Congress

          Annual health data and technology progress updates to Congress.

      • Careers
        • Careers at ASTP

          View opportunities with ASTP.

        • Working at ASTP

          Overview of workplace culture and employee experience.

      • Contact
        • Contact Us

          Reach ASTP with general inquiries.

        • Health IT Feedback Form

          Users can submit feedback regarding health data and technology usability, interoperability, and compliance issues.

        • Report Issue with Certified Health IT

          Complaint process to resolve any issues of potential noncompliance with certification requirements.

        • Information Blocking Claim

          Form to report alleged information blocking practices.

        • Speaker Request

          Form to request ASTP experts for speaking engagements.

      • Funding Opportunities
        • Funding Announcements

          ASTP’s contractors and grantees play a valuable role in helping promote better health care for Americans by fostering interoperable health data and technology.

        • Grants Management & Process

          Learn about opportunities for funding through grants and cooperative agreements.

  • Blog
Popular searches: certifications information blocking interoperability

Health IT Research & Analysis

    • Data Types
    • Categories
    • Sort By
Data Briefs iconData Briefs

Family Medicine Physicians’ Documentation Methods and the Value of Access to External Data for Addressing Social Needs

No. 76 | November 2024
  • Family Medicine Physicians’ Documentation Methods and the Value of Access to External Data for Addressing Social Needs [PDF – 347.07 KB]
Link to Page Icon Link to Page
  • Overview

Family medicine physicians can play an important role in addressing social factors that impact health and health equity (1). Family physicians often provide care for individuals in medically underserved communities (2) and are well-positioned to collect information on patients’ health-related social needs and social determinants of health (SDOH) that can be used to inform clinical-decision making, refer patients to social services, and identify health inequities. Collectively, these health equity data can help care teams identify and address health disparities and improve patient and population health (3). This brief uses data from 3 years (2022-2024) of the American Board of Family Medicine’s Continuous Certification Questionnaire, which is fielded as two separate modules to mitigate participant burden. Using data from one module, we describe methods physicians use to document social needs in their electronic health record (EHR) system, particularly structured methods that facilitate data sharing with other organizations. Using data from a second module, we describe family physicians’ rated importance of having access to external SDOH data from other organizations and how this varies by patient population and availability of resources to address social needs. Together, findings provide insight into the ability of family medicine practices to address social factors that impact health and health equity.

Highlights

  • In 2022-2024, most family physicians who documented social needs in their electronic health record (EHR) system used a combination of free-text notes and structured methods, such as checking a box/button or entering it as a diagnosis.
  • Physicians in small, independently owned practices had lower rates of social needs documentation in the EHR—especially using structured methods—compared to those in large, academic health centers or hospitals.
  • Nearly all family physicians nationally rated their access to external social determinants of health (SDOH) data to be very or somewhat important, especially those serving vulnerable patient populations as these physicians may have greater awareness of how SDOH can impact their patients’ health and care.
  • Physicians who reported their clinic has resources available to address social needs had higher rates of structured documentation and placed greater importance on having access to external SDOH data, indicating a relationship between how data are captured and received and whether those data can be used to improve patient and population health.

In 2024, over half of family physicians used structured methods—check boxes/buttons or diagnosis codes—to document social needs in the EHR.

Findings

  • In 2024, 60% of family physicians used free-text notes to document social needs in their EHR, a slight decrease from 2022 and 2023.
  • Documenting social needs by checking a box/button in the EHR was more common than entering it as a diagnosis (i.e., ICD-10-CM Z codes). However, both types of structured documentation methods increased significantly between 2023 and 2024.
  • Overall, family physicians’ use of structured methods—checkboxes/buttons or diagnosis codes— to document social needs is on the rise, with 58% using at least one structured method in 2024, a significant increase from 55% in 2023.

Figure 1: Trends in the methods family physicians often or sometimes use to document screening for social needs in primary outpatient EHR, 2022-2024.

Figure 1: Trends in the methods family physicians often or sometimes use to document screening for social needs in primary outpatient EHR, 2022-2024
This figure contains a cluster column chart illustrating the different methods family physicians often or sometimes use to document screening for social needs in their primary outpatient EHR across the years 2022 to 2024. 
The first cluster of columns shows that the share of family physicians who use free-text notes to document social needs in their EHR increased from 61 percent in 2022 to 62 percent in 2023, and then decreased significantly to 60 percent in 2024.
The second cluster of columns shows that the share of family physicians who use a checkbox or button to document social needs in their EHR decreased from 46 percent in 2022 to 44 percent in 2023, and then increased significantly to 47 percent in 2024.
The third cluster of columns shows that the share of family physicians who use diagnosis codes to document social needs in their EHR decreased from 35 percent in 2022 to 33 percent in 2023, and then increased significantly to 36 percent in 2024.
The fourth cluster of columns shows that the share of family physicians who use structured methods (checking a box/button or diagnosis codes) to document social needs in their EHR decreased from 56% in 2022 to 55% in 2023, and then increased significantly to 58% in 2024.
Source: 2022-2024 American Board of Family Medicine Continuous Certification Questionnaire
Notes: The denominator represents family physicians who use an EHR. This includes Module B respondents in 2022 (N = 2,066) and 2023 (N = 4,109), and all respondents in 2024 (N = 7,620). “Structured methods” = an aggregate measure indicating respondents who often or sometimes used checkbox/button or diagnosis codes to document social needs in the EHR. *Indicates statistically significant difference from prior year (P<.05). ). See Appendix Table 1 for survey questions and Data Sources and Methods for respondent population.

Most family physicians who document social needs in their EHR use a combination of free-text notes and structured documentation methods.

Findings

  • While free-text notes remain the most common method used by family physicians to document social needs in the EHR, only 16% of physicians used this method exclusively.
  • Nearly half of family physicians (44%) used free-text notes in combination with at least one structured method—checkbox/button (13%), diagnosis codes (9%) or both (22%)—to document social needs in their EHR. Only 13% used structured methods exclusively.
  • About a quarter of family physicians (27%) did not document social needs in their EHR.

Figure 2: Combination of methods family physicians often or sometimes use to document screening for social needs in primary outpatient EHR, 2022-2024 (pooled).

Figure 2: Combination of methods family medicine physicians often or sometimes use to document screening for social needs in primary outpatient EHR, 2022-2024 (pooled)
This figure contains a Euler diagram consisting of three overlapping ovals that illustrate the different combinations of methods family physicians often or sometimes use to document screening for social needs in their primary outpatient EHR.
The largest oval illustrates the share of family physicians who use free-text notes (60 percent in total), the second largest oval illustrates the share who use checkbox/buttons (47 percent in total), and the smallest oval illustrates the share who use diagnosis codes (35 percent in total). 
Areas of overlap between the ovals indicate that 13 percent of family physicians use free-text notes and checkbox/buttons, 9 percent use free-text notes and diagnosis codes, 3 percent use checkbox/buttons and diagnosis codes, and 22 percent use all three methods (free-text, checkbox/button, diagnosis codes). Areas of non-overlap between the ovals show that 16 percent of family physicians use only free-text notes, 9 percent use only checkbox/buttons, and 1 percent use only diagnosis codes. 
This figure also contains a separate non-overlapping circle to indicate the 27 percent of family physicians who do not document social needs in their EHR.
Source: 2022-2024 American Board of Family Medicine Continuous Certification Questionnaire
Notes: The denominator represents a pooled sample of family physicians from 2022-2024 who use an EHR (N = 13,795). This includes Module B respondents in 2022-2023 (N = 6,175) and all respondents in 2024 (N = 7,620). See Appendix Table 1 for survey questions and Data Sources and Methods for respondent population. See Appendix Table 2 for a simplified exposition of these relationships.

Physicians in small, independent practices had lower rates of EHR documentation using any method compared to those in large, academic health centers or hospitals.

Findings

  • Family physicians in academic health centers and those serving a large share (>50%) of vulnerable patients had the highest rates of any social needs documentation in the EHR (83% and 82%, respectively) and using structured methods (67% and 66%, respectively).
  • Family physicians in independent practices, serving a small share (<10%) of vulnerable patients, and those not participating in value-based care had the lowest rates of any (67%, 66%, and 61%, respectively) and structured documentation (48%, 50%, and 39%, respectively).
  • Family physicians using one of the top 3 EHR vendors by market share had higher rates of any (75%) and structured documentation (60%) compared to those using smaller vendors.

Table 1: Methods family physicians often or sometimes use to document screening for social needs in primary outpatient EHR, by practice characteristics, 2022-2024 (pooled).

 Any documentation in EHR (73%)Structured documentation (57%)
Practice site
Academic health center (ref)83%67%
Government80%67%
Hospital/health system74%*59%*
Independent67%*48%*
Other69%*53%*
Practice size
1 to 5 (ref)70%53%
6 to 1076%*61%*
>2073%*58%*
Location
Rural73%54%
Urban73%57%*
Value-based care
Yes (ref)77%62%
No61%*39%*
Don’t know64%*47%*
Vulnerable patient pop %
<10% (ref)66%50%
10-49%74%*57%*
>50%82%*66%*
EHR vendor market share^
Top 3 vendors by market share (ref)75%60%
4th to 6th market position72%*54%*
7th to 9th market position68%*49%*
All other vendors69%*49%*
Source: 2022-2024 American Board of Family Medicine Continuous Certification Questionnaire
Notes: “Any documentation in EHR” = often or sometimes used at least 1 of 3 methods in Figure 1 to document social needs in the EHR. Structured documentation = often or sometimes used structured methods (checkbox/button or diagnosis codes) to document social needs in the EHR. *Indicates statistically significant difference from reference category (P<.05). See Appendix Table 1 for survey questions and Data Sources and Methods for respondent population. ^ EHR vendor market share is based on a question in the survey asking respondents to indicate their outpatient EHR vendor.

In 2022 and 2023, nearly all family physicians nationally rated their access to external SDOH data to be very or somewhat important.

Findings

  • While less than half of family physicians rated their access to external SDOH data to be “very important” – the vast majority of physicians felt it was at least somewhat important to have access to external SDOH data (e.g., housing stability, food insecurity) from other health systems/organizations.
  • While less than 1 in 10 family physicians rated their access to external SDOH data to be “not at all important,” this may be reflective of the patient populations they serve (e.g., low prevalence of social needs) or greater reliance on data collected internally.

Figure 3: Family physicians’ rated importance of having access to external SDOH data from other health systems/organizations, 2022-2023.

Figure 3: Family physicians’ rated importance of having access to external SDOH data from other health systems/organizations, 2022-2023
This figure contains a clustered column chart illustrating family physicians’ rated importance of having access to external SDOH data from other health systems or organizations in the years 2022 and 2023.
The first cluster of columns shows that the share of family physicians who believed it was “Not at all important” to have access to SDOH data from other health systems/organizations increased from 7 percent in 2022 to 8 percent in 2023. 
The second cluster of columns shows that the share of family physicians who believed it was “Somewhat important” to have access to SDOH data from other health systems/organizations increased significantly from 48 percent in 2022 to 51 percent in 2023. 
The third cluster of columns shows that the share of family physicians who believed it was “Very important” to have access to SDOH data decreased significantly from 45 percent in 2022 to 41 percent in 2023.
Source: 2022-2023 American Board of Family Medicine Continuous Certification Questionnaire
Notes: Denominator represents family physicians who responded to Module A of each survey and use an EHR (N = 2,088 in 2022 and N = 4,087 in 2023). Question was not asked in 2024. *Indicates statistically significant difference from prior year (P<.05). See Appendix Table 1 for survey questions and Data Sources and Methods for respondent population. 

Physicians serving a higher share of vulnerable patients placed greater importance on having access to external SDOH data.

Findings

  • In 2022-2023, family physicians serving a large (>50%) or moderate (10-49%) share of vulnerable patients had higher rates of indicating it is “very important” to have access to external SDOH data (47% and 42%, respectively) compared to those with a small share (<10%) of vulnerable patients (38%).
  • Sixty-two percent of family physicians with a small share of vulnerable patients (<10%) indicated it was somewhat (53%) or not at all important (9%) to have access to external SDOH.

Figure 4: Family physicians’ rated importance of having access to external SDOH data from other health systems/organizations, by share of vulnerable patient population, 2022-2023 (pooled).

Figure 4: Family physicians’ rated importance of having access to external SDOH data from other health systems/organizations, by share of vulnerable patient population, 2022-2023 (pooled).
This figure contains a stacked column chart illustrating family physicians’ rated importance of having access to external SDOH data from other health systems or organizations, by share of vulnerable patient population served (less than 10 percent, 10 to 49 percent, greater than 50 percent).
The first column shows that among family physicians serving less than 10 percent vulnerable patients, 38 percent reported it was “Very important” to have access to external SDOH data from other health systems/organizations, 53 percent reported it was “Somewhat important,” and 9 percent reported it was “Not at all important.”
The second column shows that among family physicians serving 10 to 49 percent vulnerable patients, 42 percent reported it was “Very important” to have access to external SDOH data from other health systems/organizations (a significant difference from those serving less than 10 percent vulnerable patients), 50 percent reported it was “Somewhat important,” and 8 percent reported it was “Not at all important.” 
The third column shows that among family physicians serving greater than 50 percent vulnerable patients, 47 percent reported it was “Very important” to have access to external SDOH data from other health systems/organizations (a significant difference from those serving less than 10 percent vulnerable patients), 46 percent reported it was “Somewhat important” (a significant difference from those serving less than 10 percent vulnerable patients), and 7 percent reported it was “Not at all important.”
Source: 2022-2023 American Board of Family Medicine Continuous Certification Questionnaire
Notes: The denominator represents a pooled sample of family physicians from 2022-2023 who use an EHR (N = 6,175), grouped by <10% vulnerable patients (N = 2,160, 35%), 10-49% vulnerable patients (N = 2,662, 43%), and >50% vulnerable patients (N = 1,353, 22%). *Indicates statistically significant difference from reference group (<10% vulnerable patients) (P<.05). See Appendix Table 1 for survey questions and Data Sources and Methods for respondent population. 

Family physicians who reported their clinic had resources to address social needs placed greater importance on having access to external SDOH data and had higher rates of structured documentation.

Findings

  • Family physicians who reported their clinic had resources—such as dedicated staff and linkages to community programs—to address social needs (Appendix Figure 1) had higher rates of indicating it is “very important” to have access to external SDOH data (44%) compared to those who do not have resources available (40%) (Panel A).
  • Family physicians who reported their clinic had resources to address social needs also had higher rates of using structured methods to document social needs (65%)—which may facilitate data sharing with other providers or community-based organizations—compared to those who do not have resources available (41%) (Panel B).

Figure 5: Family physicians’ rated importance of having access to external SDOH data (Panel A) and use of structured methods to document social needs (Panel B), by availability of resources and tools to address patients’ social needs.

Panel A: Importance of Access to External SDOH  Panel B: Use of structured methods to document social needs

Figure 5: Family medicine physicians’ rated importance of having access to external SDOH data (Panel A) and use of structured methods to document social needs (Panel B), by availability of resources and tools to address patients' social needs.
This figure contains two stacked column charts illustrating family physicians’ rated importance of having access to external SDOH data from other health systems or organizations (left panel) and use of structured methods to document social needs (right panel), by the availability of resources and tools to address patients’ social needs.
The first column of the stacked column chart in the left panel shows that among family physicians who have “Resources available” to address social needs, 44 percent reported it was “Very important” to have access to external SDOH data from other health systems/organizations (a significant difference from those without resources), 49 percent reported it was “Somewhat important,” and 7 percent reported it was “Not at all important” (a significant difference from those without resources). The second column of the chart in the left panel shows that among family physicians who “Do not have resources” available to address social needs, 40 percent reported it was “Very important” to have access to external SDOH data from other health systems/organizations, 48 percent reported it was “Somewhat important,” and 12 percent reported it was “Not at all important.” 
The first column of the stacked column chart in the right panel shows that among family physicians who have “Resources available” to address social needs, 65 percent collected data in a “Structured” format and 35 percent collected data that is “Not structured”—both of which are significantly different from those without resources. The second column of the chart in the right panel shows that among family physicians who “Do not have resources” available to address social needs, 41 percent collected data in a “Structured” format and 59 percent collected data that is “Not structured.”
Source: 2022-2023 (Panel A) and 2022-2024 (Panel B) American Board of Family Medicine Continuous Certification Questionnaire
Notes: The denominators in Panels A and B represent a pooled sample of family physicians who use an EHR from 2022-2023 (N = 6,175) and 2022-2024 (N = 13,795), respectively, grouped by those who indicated they agree their clinic has “Resources available” to address social needs (56% of the full sample) and those who disagree and “Do not have resources” to address social needs (23% of the full sample). Neutral responses (neither agree nor disagree) are not reported (22% of the full sample). *Indicates statistically significant difference between groups (P<.05). See Appendix Table 1 for survey questions and Data Sources and Methods for respondent population. 

Summary

Family physicians can play an important role in addressing the social risk factors that impact the health of patients and communities by screening for individuals’ health-related social needs and broader SDOH. Data captured through screening can be used to inform clinical decision-making, refer patients to social services or resources, and identify and address health inequities in the community. In 2022-2024, nearly three-quarters of physicians (73%) used at least one of three methods—free-text notes, checkbox/button, diagnosis codes—to document social needs in their EHR. While more than half of family physicians (61%) used free-text notes to document social needs in the EHR, only 16% used this method exclusively, and 44% used free-text notes in combination with at least one structured method. Our findings suggest the use of structured methods are on the rise with 58% of family physicians using at least one of two structured documentation methods in 2024, yet it is unclear how often these methods are used or which data elements are more commonly captured using structured electronic screening tools vs. free-text documentation. It is also unclear whether or how the introduction of new screening requirements and financial incentives to conduct SDOH screening assessments shape methods of documentation and perceived value of having access to data from outside sources.

While over half of physicians used structured methods to document social needs screening in their EHR, documentation practices varied by physician practice characteristics, patient population, and perceived capacity to address social needs. This is consistent with findings from a recent study of office-based physicians that demonstrated variation in documentation practices by physician specialty and practice characteristics (4). Our findings indicate that between 2022-2024, family physicians in small, independently-owned practices had lower rates of EHR documentation overall and using structured methods compared to those in large, academic health centers or hospitals, which may reflect differences in availability of resources to identify or address social needs. Notably, rates of EHR documentation were higher among physicians whose organization participates in at least one value-based care initiative—which often incorporate financial incentives for providers to screen for and address health-related social needs (5)—and among physicians serving vulnerable populations—who may have greater awareness of the social risk factors present in their community and how they impact patients’ health and care.

Structured documentation was also more common among family physicians who believe their clinic has resources available to address social needs, which indicates a relationship between how data are captured and whether this information can be used for various purposes. The use of structured methods can enable providers to more easily coordinate with and share data with other providers or community-based organizations to connect patients to social services and address immediate unmet social needs. Finally, family physicians using one of the top three EHR vendors by market share had higher rates of documentation overall and using structured methods compared to those using smaller vendors. This may be due to greater availability of standardized screening tools and templates integrated into EHRs for these larger vendors, enabling higher rates of structured data collection.

While nearly all family physicians in our study felt it was very or somewhat important to have access to external SDOH data that can help inform patient care, rated importance of having access to SDOH from outside organizations was higher among physicians serving vulnerable patient populations and among those who reported their clinic has resources to address social needs. Consistent with findings from a recent study demonstrating a positive relationship between the availability of programs or strategies at US hospitals and rates of screening and use of data on patients’ health-related social needs (6), this finding suggests perceived importance may be related to clinics’ ability to address social needs or the prevalence of unmet social needs and social risk factors in the community. Without the capacity or resources to effectively address patients’ social needs or community SDOH, physicians may place lower importance on having access to these data (7).

To help ensure that data collected and obtained are actionable and represented consistently, there are several ongoing federal and federally supported efforts to promote the standardization and exchange of structured SDOH and social needs data elements. These include standards developed by the Gravity Project to represent SDOH terminology which enable data to be captured in a standardized format in EHRs (8). Additionally, the United States Core Data for Interoperability (USCDI) includes structured SDOH data elements and specifies standards for capturing screening or assessment, problems or concerns, and goals using LOINC and SNOMED standard terminologies and ICD-10-CM Z codes, the diagnosis codes used to document SDOH (9). In 2023, the Office of the Assistant Secretary for Technology Policy/Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology (ASTP) released an SDOH Information Exchange Toolkit to support stakeholders’ use of consensus-based standards by providing resources, such as a list of standardized screening tools/toolkits, and other guidance for implementing IT infrastructure that supports SDOH data exchange (10).

Continued measurement of how physicians document and obtain health equity data is important for understanding the extent to which these data can be incorporated into online medical records and clinical workflows, and can then be exchanged or utilized for various purposes including to inform further assessment or screening and contribute to shared decision-making and care delivery. Future efforts are needed to understand how often structured data elements are mapped to consensus-based standards, as this enables more consistent documentation, and facilitates the exchange of health equity data with other providers and community partners. Further, more work is needed to identify factors that influence the value of having access to external SDOH data which, combined with social needs data collected and documented internally, can help inform an individual’s care plan and facilitate the delivery of person-centered care.

Data Sources and Methods

Data come from three waves (2022-2024) of the American Board of Family Medicine’s Continuous Certification Questionnaire, which includes family physicians who provide direct patient care. The survey was completed by 4,247 physicians in 2022 (of which 4,154 use an EHR), 8,390 physicians in 2023 (of which 8,196 use an EHR), and 7,765 physicians in the Spring recertification cohort of 2024 (of which 7,620 use an EHR). Completion of the questionnaire is required as part of ABFM’s recertification process and thus had a 100% response rate.

To mitigate burden associated with the questionnaire, certain questions were assigned to modules with approximately 50% of respondents assigned to Module A and 50% assigned to Module B. The respondent population for each year and module is included in the table below for family physicians who reported they use an EHR, which is the relevant denominator for all questions examined in this brief.

Data Availability

American Board of Family Medicine (ABFM) Continuous Certification Questionnaire data may be accessed for IRB-approved projects subject to the approval of the ABFM Research Governance Board. If you have questions or would like to learn more about the data source or these findings, you may contact ASTP_Data@hhs.gov

References

  1. American Academy of Family Physicians. Advancing Health Equity by Addressing the Social Determinants of Health in Family Medicine (Position Paper). Accessed on: July 19, 2024. Available from: https://www.aafp.org/about/policies/all/social-determinants-health-family-medicine-position-paper.html.
  2. Grumbach K, Hart LG, Mertz E, Coffman J, Palazzo L. Who is caring for the underserved? A comparison of primary care physicians and nonphysician clinicians in California and Washington. Ann Fam Med. 2003 Jul-Aug;1(2):97-104. Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1466573/
  3. The Office of the Assistant Secretary for Technology Policy. Advancing Health Equity Fact Sheet. 2024 [Accessed on: July 19, 2024].
  4. Iott BE, Patel V, Richwine C. Physician Documentation of Social Determinants of Health: Results from Two National Surveys. J Gen Intern Med (2024). Available from: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11606-024-09184-w
  5. Health Care Transformation Task Force. Value-based Payment Models: A Catalyst for Addressing the Non-Medical Factors that Influence Health. January 2018. Accessed on: Accessed July 19, 2024. Available from: https://hcttf.org/value-and-sdoh/
  6. Richwine C, Meklir S. Hospitals’ collection and use of data to address social needs and social determinants of health. Health Serv Res. 2024 Jul 2. Available from: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38952231/
  7. DesRoches CM, Wachenheim D, Garcia A, et al. Clinician and Patient Perspectives on the Exchange of Sensitive Social Determinants of Health Information. JAMA Netw Open. 2024;7(10):e2444376. Available from: https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamanetworkopen/fullarticle/2825509?resultClick=1
  8. Health Level 7. Gravity Project. Accessed on: July 26, 2024. Available from: https://www.hl7.org/gravity/
  9. Office of the Assistant Secretary for Technology Policy. United States Core Data for Interoperability (USCDI): Social Determinants of Health [Internet]. Accessed on: July 26, 2024. Available from: https://isp.healthit.gov/uscdi-data-class/social-determinants-health
  10. Office of the Assistant Secretary for Technology Policy. Social Determinants of Health Information Exchange Toolkit: Foundational Elements for Communities. February 2023 [Accessed on: July 26, 2024]. Available from: https://healthit.gov/wp-content/uploads/2023/04/2023-03-09_SDOH_Information_Exchange_Toolkit_Presentation_508.pdf.

Acknowledgements

The authors are with the Office of Standards, Certification, and Analysis, within the Office of the Assistant Secretary for Technology Policy (ASTP). The data brief was drafted under the direction of Mera Choi, Director of the Technical Strategy and Analysis Division, Vaishali Patel, Deputy Director of the Technical Strategy and Analysis Division, and Wesley Barker, Chief of the Data Analysis Branch with subject matter expertise from Samantha Meklir and JaWanna Henry.

Suggested Citation

Richwine C. Family Medicine Physicians’ Documentation Methods and the Value of Access to External Data for Addressing Social Needs. Office of the Assistant Secretary for Technology Policy. Data Brief: 76. 2024.

Appendix

Appendix Table 1: Survey questions used for analyses and respondent population.

Survey QuestionResponse OptionsRespondent Population
Rate your sense of the general importance of accessing the following types of external patient information electronically (within your EHR and/or portal): Access to social determinants of health information (e.g., housing stability, food insecurity) from other health systems/organizations)
  • Very important
  • Somewhat important
  • Not at all important
2022-2023: Module A only (50%)

2024: Not asked

Note: Not asked to respondent who indicated they do not use an EHR
How often do you document screening for social needs (such as transportation, housing, food insecurity) in your primary outpatient EHR… by checking a box/button within the EHR? by writing it in a note? By entering it as a diagnosis (i.e., ICD-10-CM Z codes)?
  • Often
  • Sometimes
  • Rarely
  • Never
  • Don’t know
2022-2023: Module B only (50%)

2024: All respondents

Note: Not asked to respondent who indicated they do not use an EHR
My clinic has the resources and tools, such as dedicated staff and linkages to community programs, to address patients’ social needs
  • Agree
  • Neutral
  • Disagree
2022-2024: All respondents
Source: 2022-2024 American Board of Family Medicine Continuous Certification Questionnaire

Appendix Table 2: Combination of methods family physicians often or sometimes use to document screening for social needs in primary outpatient EHR, 2022-2024 (pooed).

Methods of documentation 
Single method:
Free-text notes16%
Checkbox/button9%
Diagnosis codes1%
Multiple methods:
Free-text notes and Checkbox/button13%
Free-text notes and Diagnosis codes9%
Checkbox/button and Diagnosis codes3%
Free-text notes, Checkbox/button, and Diagnosis codes22%
Do not document in EHR27%
Total100%
Source: 2022-2024 American Board of Family Medicine Continuous Certification Questionnaire
Notes: The denominator represents a pooled sample of family physicians from 2022-2024 who use an EHR (N = 13,795). This includes Module B respondents in 2022-2023 (N = 6,175) and all respondents in 2024 (N = 7,620).

Appendix Figure 1: Family physicians’ beliefs that their clinic has resources available to address patients’ social needs, 2022-2024

Appendix Figure 1: Family physicians’ beliefs that their clinic has resources available to address patients' social needs, 2022-2024
This figure contains a cluster column chart illustrating family physicians’ beliefs that their clinic has resources available to address patients’ social needs across the years 2022 to 2024. 
The first cluster of columns shows that the share of family physicians who believe they have “Resources available” to address social needs decreased significantly from 57 percent in 2022 to 54 percent in 2023, and then increased significantly to 56 percent in 2024.
The second cluster of columns shows that the share of family physicians who believe they “Do not have resources” available to address social needs increased significantly from 21 percent in 2022 to 24 percent in 2023, and then decreased to 23 percent in 2024.
The third cluster of columns shows that the share of family physicians who are “Neutral” (neither or agree nor disagree that their clinic has resources available to address patients’ social needs) remained steady at 22 percent in 2022 and 2023 and decreased slightly to 21 percent in 2024.
Source: 2022-2024 American Board of Family Medicine Continuous Certification Questionnaire
Notes: Denominator represents all respondents in 2022-2024. Respondents were asked to indicate their level of agreement with the statement, “My clinic has the resources and tools, such as dedicated staff and linkages to community programs, to address patients’ social needs”: Resources available = “Agree”, Do not have resources = “Disagree”, Neutral = “Neutral” (neither agree nor disagree). *Indicates statistically significant difference from prior year (P<.05).
Submit Feedback

Submit HealthIT.gov Feedback

Step 1 of 3

33%
Name(Required)
Please provide your email address for follow-up.
What kind of issue are you experiencing?(Required)
Select the type of issue you encountered. Select all that apply.
Where did you experience this issue?(Required)
Select the type of issue you encountered. Select all that apply.
Example: Google Chrome on PC or Safari on iPhone.

Page Information

What page did you find this issue? e.g. Interoperability, ASTP Blog
e.g. https://beta.healthit.gov/interoperability
Please provide a detailed description of the issue you experienced.
Drop files here or
Max. file size: 3 MB, Max. files: 3.
    If you have any screenshots or files related to the issue, please upload them here.

    Subscribe for Email Updates

    This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

    EXPLORE

    • Certification of Health IT
    • Information Blocking
    • Interoperability
    • Health Information Technology Advisory Committee (HITAC)
    • Patient Access to Health Records
    • TEFCA
    • Policy
    • Resources

    DATA

    • HealthData.gov
    • Health IT Research & Analysis

    NEWS & EVENTS

    • Media Center
    • ASTP Blog
    • News
    • Events

    ABOUT

    • About ASTP/ONC
    • Careers
    • Contact
    • Funding Opportunities
    ASTP Logo HHS
    Linkedin
    X
    YouTube
    • Privacy Policy
    • Website Disclaimers
    • Viewers & Players
    • GobiernoUSA.gov
    • HHS Vulnerability Disclosure Policy
    • Archived Content

    External Link Notice

    Welcome to HealthIT.gov!

    Thank you for visiting the HealthIT.gov website! We welcome your feedback using the "Submit Feedback" button at the bottom of the page to help us improve your experience!