Outcomes Assessment of the Regional Health Information Exchange

T. Mäenpää; P. Asikainen; M. Gissler; K. Siponen; M. Maass; K. Saranto; T. Suominen

doi:10.3414/ME10-01-0048

Methods of Information in Medicine, Table of Contents

Methods Inf Med 2011; 50(04): 308-318
DOI: 10.3414/ME10-01-0048

Original Articles

Schattauer GmbH

Outcomes Assessment of the Regional Health Information Exchange

A Five-year Follow-up Study

Authors

T. Mäenpää

¹University of Tampere, School of Health Sciences, Nursing Science, Tampere, Finland
P. Asikainen

²Administrative Head Nurse, Satakunta Hospital District, Pori, Finland
M. Gissler

³THL National Institute for Health and Welfare, Finland & Nordic School of Public Health, Stockholm, Sweden
K. Siponen

⁴University of Oulu, Department of Mathematics, Oulu, Finland
M. Maass

⁵University of Turku, Department of Public Health, Turku, Finland
K. Saranto

⁶University of Eastern Finland, Department of Health and Social Management, Kuopio, Finland
T. Suominen

¹University of Tampere, School of Health Sciences, Nursing Science, Tampere, Finland

Abstract

Summary

Background: The implementation of a technology such as health information exchange (HIE) through a Regional Health Information System (RHIS) may improve the mobilization of health care information electronically across organizations. There is a need to coordinate care and bring together regional and local stakeholders.

Objectives: To describe how HIE had influenced health care delivery in one hospital district area in Finland.

Method: Trend analysis was used to evaluate the influence of a regional HIE. We conducted a retrospective, longitudinal study for the period 2004–2008 for the eleven federations of municipalities in the study area. We reviewed statistical health data from the time of implementation of an RHIS. The t-test was used to determine statistical significance. The selected outcomes were the data obtained from the regional database on total appointments, emergency department visits, laboratory tests and radiology examinations, and selected laboratory tests and radiology examinations carried out in both primary care and special health care.

Results: Access to HIE may have influenced health care delivery in the study area. There are indications that there is a connection between access to regional HIE and the number of laboratory tests and radiology examinations performed in both primary care and specialized health care, as observed in the decreased frequency in outcomes such as radiology examinations, number of appointments, and emergency department visits in the study environment. The decreased frequencies of the latter suggest an increased efficiency of outpatient care, but we were not able to estimate to what extent the readily available comprehensive clinical information contributed to these trends.

Conclusion: Outcome assessment of HIE through an RHIS is essential for the success of health information technology (HIT) and as evidence to use in the decision-making process. As health care information becomes more digital, it increases the potential for a strong HIE effect on health care delivery.

Keywords

Regional health information system (RHIS) - regional health information exchange - health outcome - assessment

Full Text

References

References
1 Yasnoff WA, Humphreys BL, Overhage JM, Detmer DE, Brennan PF, Morris RW. et al. A consensus action agenda for achieving the national health information infrastructure. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2004; 11 (04) 332-338.
2 Sittig DF, Shiffman RN, Leonard K, Friedman C, Rudolph B. 49 G, et al A draft framework for measuring progress towards the development of a national health information infrastructure. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak 2005; 13: 5-14.
3 Cruz-Correia RJ, Vieira-Marques PM, Ferreira AM, Almeida FC, Wyatt JC, Costa-Pereira AM. Reviewing the integration of patient data: how systems are evolving in practice to meet patient needs. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak 2007; 12: 7-14.
4 Protti D. US regional health information organizations and the nationwide health information network: any lessons for Canadians?. Health Q 2008; 11 (02) 96-101.
5 Mäenpää T, Suominen T, Asikainen P, Maass M, Rostila I. The outcomes of regional health care information systems in health care: A review of the research literature. Int J Med Inform 2009; 78 (11) 757-771.
6 Halamka J, Overhage JM, Ricciardi L, Rishel W, Shirky C, Diamond C. Exchanging health information: local distribution, national coordination. Health Aff (Millwood) 2005; 24 (05) 1170-1179.
7 Walker J, Pan E, Johnston D, Adler-Milstein J, Bates DW, Middleton B. The value of health care information exchange and interoperability. Health Aff (Millwood) 2005; 1–6: 5 (10) 5-18.
8 Shapiro JS, Kannry J, Lipton M, Goldberg E, Conocenti P, Stuard S. et al Approaches to patient health information exchange and their impact on emergency medicine. Ann Emerg Med 2006; 49 (04) 426-432.
9 Marchibroda JM. The impact of health information technology on collaborative chronic care management. J Manag Care Pharm 2008; 14 (02) 3-11.
10 Adler-Milstein J, Bates DW, Jha AK. U S. Regional health information organizations: progress and challenges. Health Aff (Millwood) 2009; 28 (02) 483-492.
11 Tripathi M, Delano D, Lund B, Rudolph L. Engaging patients for health information exchange. Health Aff (Millwood) 2009; 28 (02) 435-443.
12 Yahata K, Higashi T, Koga M, Koike A, Iseda T, Kusaba T. A medical association hospital centered network for inter-institutional treatment in a regional area, Japan. Stud Health Technol Inform 2004; 107 (02) 1235-1237.
13 Miller RH, Miller BS. The Santa Barbara County care data exchange: what happened?. Health Aff (Millwood) 2007; 26 (05) 568-580.
14 Grossman JM, Kushner KL, November EA. Creating sustainable local health information exchanges: can barriers to stakeholder participation be overcome?. Res Briefs 2008; 2 (02) 1-12.
15 Shapiro JS. Evaluating public health uses of health information exchange. J Biomed Inf 2007; 40 (06) 46-49.
16 Asikainen P, Suominen T, Mäenpää T, Maass M. Shared use of social health care regional information system and its’ significance estimated by professionals. Nursing Evidence 2009; 7 (02) 28-33.
17 Stead WW, Kelly BJ, Kolodner RM. Achievable steps toward building a national health information infrastructure in the United States. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2005; 12 (02) 113-120.
18 Jha AK, Doolan D, Grandt D, Scott T, Bates DW. The use of health information technology in seven nations. Int J Med Inform 2008; 77 (12) 849-854.
19 Lee RC, Marshall D, Waddell C, Hailey D, Juzwishin D. Health technology assessment, research, and implementation within a health region in Alberta, Canada. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 2003; 19 (03) 513-520.
20 Carlsson P. Health technology assessment and priority setting for health policy in Sweden. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 2004; 20 (01) 44-54.
21 Koval D. Real-world RHIO A regional health information organization blazes a trail in Upstate New York. J AHIMA 2005; 76 (03) 44-48.
22 Rashiq S, Barton P, Harstall C, Schopflocher D, Taenzer P. et al.. The Alberta ambassador program: delivering health technology assessment results to rural practitioners. BMC Med Educ 2006; 31 (06) 21.
23 Scales DC, Laupacis A. Health technology assessment in critical care. Intensive Care Med 2007; 33 (12) 2183-2191.
24 Andradas E, Blasco JA, Valentín B, López-Pedraza M-J, Gracia FJ. Defining products for a new health technology assessment agency in Madrid, Spain: a survey of decision makers. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 2008; 24 (01) 60-69.
25 Kern LM, Kaushal R. Health information technology and health information exchange in New York State: new initiatives in implementation and evaluation. J Biomed Inform 2007; 40 (06) 17-20.
26 Marchibroda JM. Health information exchange policy and evaluation. J Biomed Inform 2007; 40 (06) 11-16.
27 Frisse ME, Holmes RL. Estimated financial savings associated with health information exchange and ambulatory care referral. J Biomed Inform 2007; 40 (06) 27-32.
28 Kaelber DC. Bates DW Health information exchange and patient safety. J Biomed Inform 2007; 40 (06) 40-45.
29 Vest JR. Health information exchange and health care utilization. J Med Syst 2009; 33 (03) 223-231.
30 Brailer D, Augostinos N, Evans L, Karp S. Moving toward electronic health information exchange: Interim report on the Santa Barbara County data exchange. California Foundation and the Care Data Exchange 2003
31 Harno K, Gronhagen-Riska C, Pohjonen H, Kinnunen J, Kekomaki M. Integrated regional services: are working process changes desirable and achievable?. J Telemed Telecare 2002; 8 (03) 26-28.
32 Kuhn KA, Wurst SH, Bott OJ, Giuse DA. Expanding the scope of health information systems. Challenges and developments. Yearbk Med Inform. 2006 pp 43-52.
33 Shapiro JS, Kannry J, Kushniruk AW, Kuperman G. Emergency physicians’ perceptions of health information exchange. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2007; 14 (06) 700-705.
34 Freeman D. Pay for performance: a win for the NHIN?. Healthc Financ Manage 2005; 59 (08) 120-121.
35 Garrido T, Jamieson L, Zhou Y, Wiesenthal A, Liang L. Effect of electronic health records in ambulatory care: retrospective, serial, cross sectional study. BMJ 2005; 12: 330 (7491): 581.
36 Maass M, Asikainen P, Mäenpää T, Wanne O, Suominen T. Regional health care network efficient and cost-saving. Finnish Medic J 2007; 62 27–31 2673-2678.
37 Sprivulis P, Walker J, Johnston D, Pan E, Adler-Milstein J, Middleton B, Bates DW. The economic benefits of health information exchange interoper-ability for Australia. Aust Health Rev 2007; 31 (04) 531-539.
38 Overhage JM, Dexter PR, Perkins SM, Cordell WH, McGoff J, McGrath R. et al. Randomized, controlled trial of clinical information shared from another institution. Ann Emerg Med 2002; 39 (01) 14-23.
39 Smith PC, Araya-Guerra R, Bublitz C, Parnes B, Dickinson LM, Van Vorst R. Missing clinical information during primary care visits. JAMA 2005; 2; 293 (05) 565-571.
40 Finnell JT, Overhage JM, Dexter PR, Perkins SM, Lane KA, McDonald CJ. Community clinical data exchange for emergency medicine patients. AMIA Annu Symp Proc. 2003 pp 235-238.
41 Maass MC, Asikainen P, Mäenpää T, Wanne O, Suominen T. Usefulness of a regional health care information system in primary care: a case study. Comput Methods Programs Biomed 2008; 91 (02) 175-181.
42 Bates DW, Leape LL, Cullen DJ, Laird N, Petersen LA, Teich JM. et al. Effect of computerized physician order entry and team intervention on prevention of serious medication errors. JAMA 1998; 21: 280 (15) 1311-1316.
43 Hripcsak G, Kaushal R, Johnson KB, Ash JS, Bates DW, Block R, Frisse ME. et al. The united hospital fund meeting on evaluating health information exchange. J Biomed Inform 2007; 40 (06) 3-10.
44 Rudin RS, SM, Simon SR, Volk LA, Tripathi M, Bates D. Understanding the decisions and values of stakeholders in health information exchanges: experiences from Massachusetts. Am J Public Health 2009; 99 (05) 950-955.
45 Nahm ES, Vaydia V, Ho D, Scharf B, Seagull J. Outcomes assessment of clinical information system implementation: a practical guide. Nurs Outlook 2007; 55 (06) 282-288.
46 Ministry of Social Affairs and Health 2009. Social and health services. Health services. http://www.stm.fi/en/social_and_health_services
47 Itälä T, Virtanen A, Mikola T, Asikainen P. Seamless service chains and information processes. Proceedings of the 38th annual Hawaii international conference on system sciences (HICSS’05); 2005 (6): 155b
48 Asikainen P, Suominen T, Itälä T, Mäenpää T, Wanne O, Maass M. Implementing the regional information system to integrate social and health care services – from data transfer towards effective care. OJNI. 2009 13(1). http:ojni.org/13_1/Asikainen.pdf