Developing common methods for evaluating health information exchange

A Patient-Centered Framework for Evaluating Digital Maturity of Health Services: A Systematic Review

Background

Digital maturity is the extent to which digital technologies are used as enablers to deliver a high-quality health service. Extensive literature exists about how to assess the components of digital maturity, but it has not been used to design a comprehensive framework for evaluation. Consequently, the measurement systems that do exist are limited to evaluating digital programs within one service or care setting, meaning that digital maturity evaluation is not accounting for the needs of patients across their care pathways.

Objective

The objective of our study was to identify the best methods and metrics for evaluating digital maturity and to create a novel, evidence-based tool for evaluating digital maturity across patient care pathways.

Methods

We systematically reviewed the literature to find the best methods and metrics for evaluating digital maturity. We searched the PubMed database for all papers relevant to digital maturity evaluation. Papers were selected if they provided insight into how to appraise digital systems within the health service and if they indicated the factors that constitute or facilitate digital maturity. Papers were analyzed to identify methodology for evaluating digital maturity and indicators of digitally mature systems. We then used the resulting information about methodology to design an evaluation framework. Following that, the indicators of digital maturity were extracted and grouped into increasing levels of maturity and operationalized as metrics within the evaluation framework.

Results

We identified 28 papers as relevant to evaluating digital maturity, from which we derived 5 themes. The first theme concerned general evaluation methodology for constructing the framework (7 papers). The following 4 themes were the increasing levels of digital maturity: resources and ability (6 papers), usage (7 papers), interoperability (3 papers), and impact (5 papers). The framework includes metrics for each of these levels at each stage of the typical patient care pathway.

Conclusions

The framework uses a patient-centric model that departs from traditional service-specific measurements and allows for novel insights into how digital programs benefit patients across the health system.

Trial Registration

N/A

Perceptions regarding the ease of use and usefulness of health information exchange systems among medical providers, case managers and non-clinical staff members working in HIV care and community settings

PURPOSE

The objective of this paper is to describe how members of HIV patients' care teams perceived the usefulness and ease of use of newly implemented, innovative health information exchange systems (HIEs) in diverse HIV treatment settings. Five settings with existing electronic medical records (EMRs) received special funding to test enhancements to their systems. Participating clinics and community-based organizations added HIEs permitting bi-directional exchange of information across multiple provider sites serving the same HIV patient population.

METHODS

We conducted in-depth qualitative interviews and quantitative web-based surveys with case managers, medical providers, and non-clinical staff members to assess the systems' perceived usefulness and ease of use shortly after the HIEs were implemented. Our approach to data analysis was iterative. We first conducted a thematic analysis of the qualitative data and discovered that there were key differences in perceptions and actual use of HIEs across occupational groups. We used these results to guide our analysis of the quantitative survey data, stratifying by occupational group.

RESULTS

We found differences in reports of how useful and how well-used HIEs were, by occupation. Medical providers were more likely to use HIEs if they provided easier access to clinical information than was present in existing EMRs. Case managers working inside medical clinics found HIEs to be less helpful because they already had access to the clinical data. In contrast, case managers working in community settings appreciated the new access to patient information that the HIEs provided. Non-clinical staff uniformly found the HIEs useful for a broad range of tasks including clinic administration, grant writing and generating reports for funders.

CONCLUSION

Our study offers insights into the use and potential benefits of HIE in the context of HIV care across occupational groups.

Health information exchange and healthcare utilization

Health information exchange (HIE) makes previously inaccessible data available to clinicians, resulting in more complete information. This study tested the hypotheses that HIE information access reduced emergency room visits and inpatient hospitalizations for ambulatory care sensitive conditions among medically indigent adults. HIE access was quantified by how frequently system users' accessed patients' data. Encounter counts were modeled using zero inflated binomial regression. HIE was not accessed for 43% of individuals. Patient factors associated with accessed data included: prior utilization, chronic conditions, and age. Higher levels of information access were significantly associated with increased counts of all encounter types. Results indicate system users were more likely to access HIE for patients for whom the information might be considered most beneficial. Ultimately, these results imply that HIE information access did not transform care in the ways many would expect. Expectations in utilization reductions, however logical, may have to be reevaluated or postponed.