Download PDF
CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 · Methods Inf Med 2020; 59(S 01): e1-e12
DOI: 10.1055/s-0040-1712465
Original Article
Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York

Professionalism of Information Management in Health Care: Development and Validation of the Construct and Its Measurement

Johannes Thye
1   Health Informatics Research Group, University of Applied Sciences Osnabrück, Osnabrück, Lower Saxony, Germany
,
Moritz Esdar
1   Health Informatics Research Group, University of Applied Sciences Osnabrück, Osnabrück, Lower Saxony, Germany
,
Jan-David Liebe
1   Health Informatics Research Group, University of Applied Sciences Osnabrück, Osnabrück, Lower Saxony, Germany
2   Institute of Medical Informatics, UMIT, University for Health Sciences, Medical Informatics and Technology, Hall in Tyrol, Austria
,
Franziska Jahn
3   Institute for Medical Informatics, Statistics and Epidemiology, University of Leipzig, Leipzig, Saxony, Germany
,
Alfred Winter
2   Institute of Medical Informatics, UMIT, University for Health Sciences, Medical Informatics and Technology, Hall in Tyrol, Austria
,
Ursula Hübner
1   Health Informatics Research Group, University of Applied Sciences Osnabrück, Osnabrück, Lower Saxony, Germany
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

05 February 2020

10 April 2020

Publication Date:
03 July 2020 (online)

   Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Background Against the background of a steadily increasing degree of digitalization in health care, a professional information management (IM) is required to successfully plan, implement, and evaluate information technology (IT). At its core, IM has to ensure a high quality of health data and health information systems to support patient care.

Objectives The goal of the present study was to define what constitutes professional IM as a construct as well as to propose a reliable and valid measurement instrument.

Methods To develop and validate the construct of professionalism of information management (PIM) and its measurement, a stepwise approach followed an established procedure from information systems and behavioral research. The procedure included an analysis of the pertaining literature and expert rounds on the construct and the instrument, two consecutive and comprehensive surveys at the national and international level, exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses as well as reliability and validity testing.

Results Professionalism of information management was developed as a construct consisting of the three dimensions of strategic, tactical, and operational IM as well as of the regularity and cyclical phases of IM procedures as the two elements of professionalism. The PIM instrument operationalized the construct providing items that incorporated IM procedures along the three dimensions and cyclical phases. These procedures had to be evaluated against their degree of regularity in the instrument. The instrument proved to be reliable and valid in two consecutive measurement phases and across three countries.

Conclusion It can be concluded that professionalism of information management is a meaningful construct that can be operationalized in a scientifically rigorous manner. Both science and practice can benefit from these developments in terms of improved self-assessment, benchmarking capabilities, and eventually, obtaining a better understanding of health IT maturity.

Keywords

information management - professionalism - health information technology - construct - validation
 

  • References

  • 1 Winter A, Haux R, Ammenwerth E, Brigl B, Hellrung N, Jahn F. Strategic Information Management in Hospitals. In: Winter A, Haux R, Ammenwerth E, Brigl B, Hellrung N, Jahn F, eds. Health Information Systems: Architectures and Strategies. 2nd Edition. London: Springer; 2011:237–282
    PubMed
  • 2 Arvanitis S, Loukis EN. Investigating the effects of ICT on innovation and performance of European hospitals: an exploratory study. Eur J Health Econ 2016; 17 (04) 403-418
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Kuperman G. Reflections on AMIA—looking to the future. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2013; 20 (e2): e367
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Avgar AC, Litwin AS, Pronovost PJ. Drivers and barriers in health IT adoption: a proposed framework. Appl Clin Inform 2012; 3 (04) 488-500
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Bradley RV, Byrd TA, Pridmore JL, Thrasher E, Pratt RME, Mbarika VWA. An empirical examination of antecedents and consequences of IT governance in US hospitals. J Inf Technol 2012; 27: 156-177
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Haux R, Winter A, Ammenwerth E, Brigl B. Strategic Information Management in Hospitals – An Introduction to Hospital Information Systems. New York: Springer-Verlag; 2004
    PubMed
  • 7 Seidel C. Strategisches Informations management. In: Schlegel H. , ed. Steuerung der IT im Klinikmanagement. Wiesbaden: Vieweg+Teubner Verlag; 2010: 29-52
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Schlegel H. IT-Governance mit COBIT—Methodenunterstützung für das Management. In: Schlegel H. , ed. Steuerung der IT im Klinikmanagement. Wiesbaden: Vieweg+Teubner Verlag; 2010: 7-27
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Winter A, Ammenwerth E, Bott OJ, et al. Strategic Information management plans: the basis for systematic information management in hospitals. Int J Med Inform. 2001;64:99–109
    PubMed
  • 10 Otieno GO, Hinako T, Motohiro A, Daisuke K, Keiko N. Measuring effectiveness of electronic medical records systems: towards building a composite index for benchmarking hospitals. Int J Med Inform 2008; 77 (10) 657-669
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Zarnekow R, Brenner W. Integriertes Informationsmanagement: Vom Plan, Build, Run zum Source, Make, Deliver. In: Zarnekow R, Brenner W, Grohmann HH. , eds. Informationsmanagement. Konzepte und Strategien für die Praxis. Heidelberg: dpunkt.verlag; 2004: 3-24
    Google Scholar
  • 12 Wild J. Management-Konzeption und Unternehmensverfassung. In: Schmidt RB. , ed. Probleme der Unternehmensverfassung. Tübingen: Mohr; 1971
    Google Scholar
  • 13 Krcmar H. Informationsmanagement. 6th revised ed. Berlin: Springer Gabler; 2015
    Google Scholar
  • 14 Zarnekow R, Brenner W. Auf dem Weg zu einem produkt- und dienstleistungsorientierten IT-Management. Praxis Wirtschaftsinformatik 2003; 232: 7-16
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Hofmann J, Schmidt W. Masterkurs IT-Management. 2nd updated and extended ed. Wiesbaden: Vieweg and Teubner Verlag; 2010
    Google Scholar
  • 16 MacKenzie SB, Podsakoff PM, Podsakoff NP. Construct measurement and validation procedures in MIS and behavioral research: integrating new and existing techniques. Manage Inf Syst Q 2011; 35 (02) 293-334
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Liebe JD, Hübner U, Straede MC, Thye J. Developing a Workflow Composite Score to Measure Clinical Information Logistics. A Top-down Approach. Methods Inf Med. 2015;54(05):424–433
    PubMed
  • 18 Thye J, Hübner U, Straede M-C, Liebe JD. Development and evaluation of a three-dimensional multi-level model for visualising the workflow composite score in a health IT benchmark. JBEI. 2016;2(02):83–98
    PubMed
  • 19 Thye J, Straede M-C, Liebe JD, Hübner U. IT-Benchmarking of Clinical Workflows: Concept, Implementation, and Evaluation. Stud Health Technol Inform. 2014;198:116–124
    PubMed
  • 20 Thatcher M. IT governance in acute healthcare: a critical review of current literature. In: George C, Whitehouse D, Duquenoy P. , eds. eHealth: Legal, Ethical and Governance Challenges. Berlin: Springer-Verlag; 2013: 349-370
    Google Scholar
  • 21 ISACA. COBIT 5: Rahmenwerk für Governance und Management der Unternehmens-IT. Rolling Meadows: Information Systems Audit and Control Association; 2012
    Google Scholar
  • 22 Hübner U, Liebe JD, Straede MC, Thye J. IT-Report Gesundheitswesen – Schwerpunkt: IT-Unterstützung klinischer Prozesse. Osnabrück: Schriftenreihe des Niedersächsischen Ministeriums für Wirtschaft Arbeit und Verkehr; 2014
    PubMed
  • 23 Wolf EJ, Harrington KM, Clark SL, Miller MW. Sample size requirements for structural equation models: an evaluation of power, bias, and solution propriety. Educ Psychol Meas 2013; 76 (06) 913-934
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 MacCallum RC, Widaman KF, Zhang S, Hong S. Sample size in factor analysis. Psychol Methods 1999; 4 (01) 84-99
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Comrey AL, Lee HB. A first course in factor analysis. 2nd ed. Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates; 1992
    Google Scholar
  • 26 Cattell RB. The scientific use of factor analysis in behavioral and life sciences. New York, NY: Plenum Press; 1978
    Google Scholar
  • 27 Gorsuch RL. Factor analysis. Classic 2nd ed. New York, NY: Routledge; 2015
    Google Scholar
  • 28 Brown TA. Confirmatory factor analysis for applied research. New York, NY: The Guilford Press; 2006
    Google Scholar
  • 29 The Pennsylvania State University. Intro—basic confirmatory factor analysis. Social Science Research Institute [online]; 2019. . Available at: https://quantdev.ssri.psu.edu/tutorials/intro-basic-confirmatory-factor-analysis . Accessed May 23, 2019
    Google Scholar
  • 30 Forero CG, Maydeu-Olivares A, Gallardo-Pujol D. Factor analysis with ordinal indicators: a Monte Carlo study comparing DWLS and ULS estimation. Struct Equ Modeling 2009; 16 (04) 625-641
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 31 Maydeu-Olivares A. Limited information estimation and testing of Thurstonian models for paired comparison data under multiple judgment sampling. Psychometrika 2001; 66 (02) 209-227
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 32 Tabachnick BG, Fidell LS. Using Multivariate Statistics. 5th ed. Boston: Allyn & Bacon/Pearson; 2007
    Google Scholar
  • 33 Hair JF, Black WC, Babin BJ, Anderson RE. Multivariate Data Analysis. 7th ed. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall; 2009
    Google Scholar
  • 34 Hübner U, Esdar M, Hüsers J, et al. IT-Report Gesundheitswesen - Schwerpunkt: Wie reif ist die IT in deutschen Krankenhäusern? Osnabrück: Schriftenreihe der Hochschule Osnabrück; 2018
    PubMed
  • 35 Paré G, Sicotte C. Information technology sophistication in health care: an instrument validation study among Canadian hospitals. Int J Med Inform 2001; 63 (03) 205-223
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 36 Weill P, Ross JWIT. Governance. Boston: Harvard Business School Press; 2004
    Google Scholar
  • 37 Chapman P, Wieder B. IT governance as a higher order capability. Paper presented at: Pacific Asia Conference on Information Systems (PACIS 2015), Singapore 2015; 2015: 150
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 38 Arezki S, Elhissi Y. Toward an IT governance maturity self-assessment model using EFQM and CobiT. Paper presented at: the International Conference on Geoinformatics and Data Analysis (ICGDA 2018), Prague 2018; 2018: 198-202
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 39 Barney J. Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. J Manage 1991; 17 (01) 99-120
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 40 Wernerfelt B. A resource-based view of the firm. Strateg Manage J 1984; 5 (02) 171-180
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 41 Esdar M, Hübner U, Liebe J-D, Hüsers J, Thye J. Understanding latent structures of clinical information logistics: A bottom-up approach for model building and validating the workflow composite score. Int J Med Inform. 2017;97:210–220
    PubMed
  • 42 Leidner DE, Preston D, Chen D. An examination of the antecedents and consequences of organizational IT innovation in hospitals. J Strategic Inf Syst 2010; 19: 154-170
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 43 Grillmayer H. Best Practice in der Servicesteuerung—ITIL und ISO 20000. In: Schlegel H. , ed. Steuerung der IT im Klinikmanagement. Wiesbaden: Vieweg and Teubner Verlag; 2010: 111-130
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 44 Vejseli S, Rossmann A. The impact of IT governance on firm performance: a literature review. Paper presented at: the Pacific Asia Conference on Information Systems (PACIS 2017), Langkawi 2017; 2017: 41
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 45 Ammenwerth E, Haux R, Knaup-Gregori P, Winter A. IT-Projektmanagement im Gesundheitswesen. 2nd Edition. Stuttgart: Schattauer GmbH; 2015
    PubMed
  • 46 Heinrich LJ, Riedl R, Stelzer D. Informationsmanagement. 10th ed. München: Oldenbourg Wissenschaftsverlag; 2011
    Google Scholar
  • 47 HIMSS Analytics—Europe. Electronic Medical Record Adoption Model; 2017. Available at: https://www.himssanalytics.org/europe/electronic-medical-record-adoption-mode . Accessed March 8, 2020
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 48 Fenton SH, Low S, Abrams KJ, Butler-Henderson K. Health Information management: changing with time. Yearb Med Inform 2017; 26 (01) 72-77
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 49 Shevlin M, Adamson G. Alternative factor models and factorial invariance of the GHQ-12: a large sample analysis using confirmatory factor analysis. Psychol Assess 2005; 17 (02) 231-236
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 50 Hütter A, Arnitz T, Riedel R. On the Nature of Effective CIO/CEO Communication. Cham: Springer; 2017
    Google Scholar
  • 51 Thye J, Hübner U, Hüsers J, Babitsch B. IT Decision Making in German Hospitals - Do CEOs Open the Black Box? Stud Health Technol Inform. 2017;243:112–116
    PubMed
  • 52 Liebe JD, Thomas O, Jahn F, et al. Zwischen Schattendasein, Governance und Entrepreneurship - Eine empirische Bestandsaufnahme zum Professionalisierungsgrad des IT-Managements in deutschen Krankenhäusern. Proceedings 13th International Conference on Wirtschaftsinformatik (WI 2017), St. Gallen 2017. 2017:559–573
    PubMed
  • 53 Liebe JD, Esdar M, Jahn F, Hübner U. Ready for HIT Innovations? Developing a Tool to Assess the Professionalism of Information Management in Hospitals. Stud Health Technol Inform. 2018;247:800–804
    PubMed