The centers are attempting to extract better information on these high-use patients and are convinced that can only happen through better data-crunching — hence the push toward EHR. But of those surveyed, less than 10 percent said they could meet meaningful use criteria, despite moving to a computerized system.

What is going wrong?

"Computerized systems for managing patient populations were not widespread; fewer than one-half of respondents reported the presence of computerized systems for any of the patient population management tasks included in the survey," the researchers reported. "Physicians with such functionalities reported that these systems varied in ease of use."

In other words, they were too hard to use. In fact, most clinics take a double hit when they transition to an electronic solution. They have to spend lots of dough on the new system. And they experience lots of lost time serving (and billing) patients while they transition. To add to the mix, physicians for the most part don't trust or like such systems because of concerns about patient privacy, and balk at adopting them.

Almost as a parting shot at the systems providers, the researchers concluded: "Results support the growing evidence that using the basic data input capabilities of an EHR does not translate into the greater opportunity that these technologies promise."

The story isn't entirely bleak. 

Electronic health record use by doctors increased from 17 percent to more than 50 percent between 2008 and this year, the Department of Health and Human Services said last month.

The rise was even more dramatic among hospitals; now more than 80 percent are using EHRs, up from 9 percent in 2008.

The increase is in part due to billions of dollars in government incentives. The federal health agency said more than 291,000 eligible professionals and 3,800 eligible hospitals have received incentive payments from the Medicare and Medicaid EHR Incentive Programs as of April.