Benchmarking Electronic Medical Records Initiatives in the US: a Conceptual Model
Tóm tắt
This article provides a conceptual model for benchmarking the use of clinical information systems within healthcare organizations. Additionally, it addresses the benefits of clinical information systems which include the reduction of errors, improvement in clinical decision-making and real time access to patient information. The literature suggests that clinical information systems provide financial benefits due to cost-savings from improved efficiency and reduction of errors. As a result, healthcare organizations should adopt such clinical information systems to improve quality of care and stay competitive in the marketplace. Our research clearly documents the increased adoption of electronic medical records in U.S. hospitals from 2005 to 2007. This is important because the electronic medical record provides an opportunity for integration of patient information and improvements in efficiency and quality of care across a wide range of patient populations. This was supported by recent federal initiatives such as the establishment of the Office of the National Coordinator of Health Information Technology (ONCHIT) to create an interoperable health information infrastructure. Potential barriers to the implementation of health information technology include cost, a lack of financial incentives for providers, and a need for interoperable systems. As a result, future government involvement and leadership may serve to accelerate widespread adoption of interoperable clinical information systems.
Tài liệu tham khảo
Kohn, L. T., Corrigan, J., & Donaldson, M. S. (2000). To err is human : building a safer health system. Washington, D.C.: National Academy.
McGlynn, E. A., Asch, S. M., Adams, J., et al. (2003). The quality of health care delivered to adults in the United States. New England journal of medicine, 348, 2635–2645. doi:10.1056/NEJMsa022615.
Institute of Medicine (U.S.) (2001). Committee on Quality of Health Care in America. Crossing the quality chasm : a new health system for the 21st century. Washington, D.C.: National Academy.
Burke, D., Menachemi, N., & Brooks, R. G. (2005). Diffusion of information technology supporting the institute of medicine's quality chasm care aims. Journal for healthcare quality, 27, 24–32, 39.
Burke, D., Menachemi, N., & Brooks, R. (2006). Health care CIOs: assessing their fit in the organizational hierarchy and their influence on information technology capability. Health care management (Frederick), 25, 167–172.
Santhanam, R., & Hartono, E. (2003). Issues in linking information technology capability to firm performance. MIS Q, 27, 125–153.
Dos Santos, B., & Peffers, K. (2005). Rewards to investors in innovative information technology applications-first movers and early followers in ATMs. Organisation scientifique, 6, 241–259. doi:10.1287/orsc.6.3.241.
Bates, D. W., & Gawande, A. A. (2003). Improving safety with information technology. New England journal of medicine, 348, 2526–2534. doi:10.1056/NEJMsa020847.
Harrison, J. P., & Palacio, C. (2006). The role of clinical information systems in health care quality improvement. Health care management (Frederick), 25, 206–212.
Brooks, R. G., Menachemi, N., Burke, D., et al. (2005). Patient safety-related information technology utilization in urban and rural hospitals. Journal of medical systems, 29, 103–109. doi:10.1007/s10916-005-2999-1.
Gandhi, T. K. (2005). Fumbled handoffs: one dropped ball after another. Annals of internal medicine, 142, 352–358.
Jain, A., Atreja, A., Harris, C. M., et al. (2005). Responding to the rofecoxib withdrawal crisis: a new model for notifying patients at risk and their health care providers. Annals of internal medicine, 142, 182–186.
Kucher, N., Koo, S., Quiroz, R., et al. (2005). Electronic alerts to prevent venous thromboembolism among hospitalized patients. New England journal of medicine, 352, 969–977. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa041533.
Ornstein, S., Jenkins, R. G., Nietert, P. J., et al. (2004). A multimethod quality improvement intervention to improve preventive cardiovascular care: a cluster randomized trial. Annals of internal medicine, 141, 523–532.
Hynes, D. M., Perrin, R. A., Rappaport, S., et al. (2004). Informatics resources to support health care quality improvement in the veterans health administration. Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association, 11, 344–350. doi:10.1197/jamia.M1548.
Menachemi, N., Burkhardt, J., Shewchuk, R., et al. (2006). Hospital information technology and positive financial performance: a different approach to finding an ROI. Journal of healthcare management, 51, 40–58 discussion 58–49.
Koppel, R., Metlay, J. P., Cohen, A., et al. (2005). Role of computerized physician order entry systems in facilitating medication errors. JAMA, 293, 1197–1203. doi:10.1001/jama.293.10.1197.
Nebeker, J. R., Hoffman, J. M., Weir, C. R., et al. (2005). High rates of adverse drug events in a highly computerized hospital. Archives of internal medicine, 165, 1111–1116. doi:10.1001/archinte.165.10.1111.
Valdes, I., Kibbe, D., Tolleson, G., et al. (2003). Metcalfe's law predicts reduced power of electronic medical record software. AMIA Annual symposium proceedings, 2003, 1038.
Valdes, I., Kibbe, D. C., Tolleson, G., et al. (2004). Barriers to proliferation of electronic medical records. Inform Prim Care, 12, 3–9.
Garrido, T., Jamieson, L., Zhou, Y., et al. (2005). Effect of electronic health records in ambulatory care: retrospective, serial, cross sectional study. BMJ, 330, 581. doi:10.1136/bmj.330.7491.581.
HIMMS Analytical Database and EMR Adoption Model (2007). HIMMS Analytics.
Wang, S. J., Middleton, B., Prosser, L. A., et al. (2003). A cost-benefit analysis of electronic medical records in primary care. American journal of medicine, 114, 397–403. doi:10.1016/S0002-9343(03)00057-3.
Hillestad, R., Bigelow, J., Bower, A., et al. (2005). Can electronic medical record systems transform health care? Potential health benefits, savings, and costs. The adoption of interoperable EMR systems could produce efficiency and safety savings of $142–$371 billion. Health affairs (Millwood), 24, 1103–1117. doi:10.1377/hlthaff.24.5.1103.
Taylor, R., Bower, A., Girosi, F., et al. (2005). Promoting health information technology: is there a case for more-aggressive government action? There are sufficient reasons for the federal government to invest now in policies to speed HIT adoption and accelerate its benefits. Health affairs (Millwood), 24, 1234–1245. doi:10.1377/hlthaff.24.5.1234.
ONCHIT Web Site.
Loonsk, J. W., McGarvey, S. R., Conn, L. A., et al. (2006). The public health information network (PHIN) preparedness initiative. Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association, 13, 1–4. doi:10.1197/jamia.M1815.
Muscatello, D. J., Churches, T., Kaldor, J., et al. (2005). An automated, broad-based, near real-time public health surveillance system using presentations to hospital emergency departments in New South Wales, Australia. BMC Public Health, 5, 141. doi:10.1186/1471-2458-5-141.