8
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Primary Care Physicians’ Satisfaction With Interoperable Health Information Technology

      research-article
      , PhD, MPP 1 , , , PhD 2 , 3 , , MD, MSPH 2 , 3 , , PhD 4 , , MD, MPH 2 , 3 , , PhD 1
      JAMA Network Open
      American Medical Association

      Read this article at

          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Key Points

          Question

          What were primary care physician perspectives on access to health information from outside organizations after years of policy support for interoperability (the ability of health information technology systems to exchange information and to use that information without special effort)?

          Findings

          In this survey study of 2088 physicians, 70% indicated being at least somewhat satisfied with access to outside information. However, only 23% indicated that it was very easy to use outside information, and very few (8%) indicated that it was very easy to use information from different electronic health record systems.

          Meaning

          The findings of this study suggest that 6 years after the 21st Century Cures Act, the policy goal of ubiquitous, high-value interoperable health information appears to remain a work in progress with heterogeneous barriers—including both too much information and missing information—limiting the value of interoperability.

          Abstract

          Importance

          Enabling widespread interoperability—the ability of health information technology systems to exchange information and to use that information without special effort—is a primary focus of public policy on health information technology. More information on clinicians’ experience using that technology can serve as one measure of the impact of that policy.

          Objective

          To assess primary care physician perspectives on the state of interoperability.

          Design, Setting, and Participants

          A cross-sectional survey of family medicine physicians in the US was conducted from December 12, 2021, to October 12, 2022. A sample of family medicine physicians who completed the Continuous Certification Questionnaire (CCQ), a required part of the American Board of Family Medicine certification process, which has a 100% response rate, were invited to participate.

          Main Outcomes and Measures

          Eighteen items on the CCQ assessed experience accessing and using various information from outside organizations, including medications, immunizations, and allergies.

          Results

          A total of 2088 physicians (1053 women [50%]; age reported categorically as either ≥50 years or <50 years) completed the CCQ interoperability questions in 2022. Of these respondents, 35% practiced in hospital or health system–owned practices, while 27% practiced in independently owned practices. Eleven percent were very satisfied with their ability to electronically access all 10 types of information from outside organizations included on the questionnaire, and a mean of 70% were at least somewhat satisfied. A total of 23% of family medicine physicians reported information from outside organizations was very easy to use, and an additional 65% reported that information was somewhat easy to use. Only 8% reported that information from different electronic health record (EHR) developers’ products was very easy to use compared with 38% who reported information from the same EHR developer’s product was very easy to use.

          Conclusions and Relevance

          This survey study of family medicine physicians found modest and uneven improvement in physicians’ experience with interoperability. These findings suggest that substantial heterogeneity in satisfaction by information type, source of information, EHR, practice type, ownership, and patient population necessitates diverse policy and strategies to improve interoperability.

          Abstract

          This survey study examines the ease of use by US family medicine physicians in obtaining information on patients through electronic health records, both within and across varied developers.

          Related collections

          Most cited references8

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          Benefits, Limits, and Risks of GPT-4 as an AI Chatbot for Medicine

            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Book: not found

            Primary Care : Balancing Health Needs, Services, and Technology

            This volume provides innovative methods to evaluate the attainment and contributions of primary systems and practitioners. It extends Starfield's 1992 book by highlighting two additional areas: equity in health services and health, and overlap between clinical medicine and public health. It provides an important basis for future directions in health policy.
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Patient experiences with coordination of care: the benefit of continuity and primary care physician as referral source.

              Coordination across a patient's health needs and providers is important to improving the quality of care. (1) Describe the extent to which adults report that their care is coordinated between their primary care physician (PCP) and specialists and (2) determine whether visit continuity with one's PCP and the PCP as the referral source for specialist visits are associated with higher coordination ratings. Cross-sectional study of the 2007 Health Tracking Household Survey. A total of 3,436 adults with a PCP and one or more visits to a specialist in the past 12 months. Coordination measures were patient perceptions of (1) how informed and up to date the PCP was about specialist care received, (2) whether the PCP talked with the patient about what happened at the recent specialist visit and (3) how well different doctors caring for a patient's chronic condition work together to manage that care. Less than half of respondents (46%) reported that their PCP always seemed informed about specialist care received. Visit continuity with the PCP was associated with better coordination of specialist care. For example, 62% of patients who usually see the same PCP reported that their PCP discussed with them what happened at their recent specialist visit vs. 48% of those who do not usually see the same PCP (adjusted percentages, p < 0.0001). When a patient's recent specialist visit was based on PCP referral (vs. self-referral or some other source), 50% reported that the PCP was informed and up to date about specialist care received (vs. 35%, p < 0.0001), and 66% reported that their PCP discussed with them what happened at their recent specialist visit (vs. 47%, p < 0.0001). Facilitating visit continuity between the patient and PCP, and encouraging the use of the PCP as the referral source would likely enhance care coordination.

                Author and article information

                Journal
                JAMA Netw Open
                JAMA Netw Open
                JAMA Network Open
                American Medical Association
                2574-3805
                26 March 2024
                March 2024
                26 March 2024
                : 7
                : 3
                : e243793
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology, Washington, DC
                [2 ]American Board of Family Medicine, Lexington, Kentucky
                [3 ]Center for Professionalism and Value in Health Care, Washington, DC
                [4 ]Division of Clinical Informatics and Digital Transformation, Department of Medicine, University of California, San Francisco
                Author notes
                Article Information
                Accepted for Publication: January 30, 2024.
                Published: March 26, 2024. doi:10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2024.3793
                Open Access: This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the CC-BY License. © 2024 Everson J et al. JAMA Network Open.
                Corresponding Author: Jordan Everson, PhD, MPP, Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology, 330 C St SW, 7th Floor, Washington, DC 20024 ( jordan.everson@ 123456hhs.gov ).
                Author Contributions: Dr Everson had full access to all of the data in the study and takes responsibility for the integrity of the data and the accuracy of the data analysis.
                Concept and design: All authors.
                Acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data: All authors.
                Drafting of the manuscript: Everson, Patel.
                Critical review of the manuscript for important intellectual content: All authors.
                Statistical analysis: Everson, Hendrix.
                Administrative, technical, or material support: Phillips.
                Supervision: Phillips, Bazemore, Patel.
                Conflict of Interest Disclosures: Dr Adler-Milstein reported receiving grants from the Office of the National Coordinator for Health IT during the conduct of the study and nonfinancial support from Augmedix outside the submitted work. No other disclosures were reported.
                Funding/Support: The Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology (ONC) provided funds to support the inclusion of the interoperability questions in the Continuous Certification Questionnaire. The ONC also supported the contributions of Drs Hendrix, Phillips, Adler-Milstein, and Bazemore to this study.
                Role of the Funder/Sponsor: The ONC was involved in design and conduct of the study; collection, management, analysis, and interpretation of the data; preparation, review, or approval of the manuscript; and the decision to submit the manuscript for publication.
                Data Sharing Statement: See Supplement 2.
                Article
                zoi240166
                10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2024.3793
                10966410
                38530309
                8412207d-7b69-4055-9e9e-8b74065da07c
                Copyright 2024 Everson J et al. JAMA Network Open.

                This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the CC-BY License.

                History
                : 18 September 2023
                : 30 January 2024
                Categories
                Research
                Original Investigation
                Online Only
                Health Informatics

                Comments

                Comment on this article

                Related Documents Log