3
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      The value of connected health information: perceptions of electronic health record users in Canada

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          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.

          Abstract

          Background

          As health care becomes more complex, it becomes more important for clinicians and patients to share information. Electronic health information exchange can help address this need. To this end, all provinces and territories (PTs) in Canada have created interoperable electronic health records (iEHRs). These secure systems offer authorized users an integrated view of a person’s healthcare history across the continuum of care. They include information such as lab results, medications, diagnostic images, clinical reports and immunization profiles. This study explores user experiences and perceived outcomes of iEHR use.

          Methods

          Surveys conducted between 2006 and 2014 asked iEHR users in six Canadian PTs about system, information and service quality; iEHR use and user satisfaction; and net quality and productivity benefits. The surveys had a core set of questions that used Likert-type scales. Results were synthesized across surveys for each evaluative dimension. Consensus among researchers and subject matter experts on whether to classify the outcomes as positive, mixed/neutral, or negative was established using a modified Delphi technique.

          Results

          A total of 2316 iEHR users responded to the six surveys. Information quality was the most studied area. Results varied across PTs, but positive outcomes were more common than mixed/neutral or negative outcomes by a 19:1:1 ratio across this dimension. The next most frequently studied aspects were user satisfaction, the impact of iEHR use on quality of care, and the impact on productivity. In all three areas, there were more positive than mixed/neutral or /negative results (ratios of 13:1:1, 14:3:1, and 15:2:1respectively).

          Conclusions

          Overall, users of iEHRs that provide secure access to patient information collated from across the health system tend to report positive outcomes, including quality of care and productivity. This study is an important first step in understanding user perspectives on iEHRs and health information exchange more broadly.

          Related collections

          Most cited references8

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

          Why are response rates in clinician surveys declining?

          To understand why response rates in clinician surveys are declining. Cross-sectional fax-back survey. British Columbia. Random sample of family physicians and all gynecologists in the College of Physicians and Surgeons of British Columbia's registry. Accuracy of the College of Physicians and Surgeons of British Columbia's registry, and the prevalence and characteristics of physicians with policies not to participate in any surveys. Of 542 physicians who received surveys, 76 (14.0%) responded. On follow-up we found the following: the College of Physicians and Surgeons of British Columbia's registry was inaccurate for 94 (17.3%) listings; 14 (2.6%) physicians were away; 100 (18.5%) were not eligible; and 197 (36.3%) had an office policy not to participate in any surveys. Compared with the respondents, physicians with an office policy not to participate in any surveys were more likely to be men, less likely to be white, more likely to have urban-based practices, and more likely to have been in practice for more than 15 years. Many physicians have an office policy not to participate in any surveys. Owing to the trend of lower response rates, recommendations of minimum response rates for clinician surveys by many journals might need to be reassessed.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            A review on systematic reviews of health information system studies.

            The purpose of this review is to consolidate existing evidence from published systematic reviews on health information system (HIS) evaluation studies to inform HIS practice and research. Fifty reviews published during 1994-2008 were selected for meta-level synthesis. These reviews covered five areas: medication management, preventive care, health conditions, data quality, and care process/outcome. After reconciliation for duplicates, 1276 HIS studies were arrived at as the non-overlapping corpus. On the basis of a subset of 287 controlled HIS studies, there is some evidence for improved quality of care, but in varying degrees across topic areas. For instance, 31/43 (72%) controlled HIS studies had positive results using preventive care reminders, mostly through guideline adherence such as immunization and health screening. Key factors that influence HIS success included having in-house systems, developers as users, integrated decision support and benchmark practices, and addressing such contextual issues as provider knowledge and perception, incentives, and legislation/policy.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              A proposed benefits evaluation framework for health information systems in Canada.

              This article describes a benefits evaluation framework for the health information systems currently being implemented across Canada through Canada Health Infoway with its jurisdictional partners and investment programs. This framework is based on the information systems success model by DeLone and McLean, the empirical analysis by van der Meijden on the use of this model in the health setting and our own review of evaluation studies and systematic review articles in health information systems. The current framework includes three dimensions of quality (system, information and service), two dimensions of system usage (use and user satisfaction) and three dimensions of net benefits (quality, access and productivity). Measures have been developed and work is under way to establish detailed evaluation plans and instruments for the individual investment programs to launch a series of benefits evaluation field studies across jurisdictions later this year.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                stharmalingam@infoway-inforoute.ca
                shagens@infoway-inforoute.ca
                jzelmer@infoway-inforoute.ca
                Journal
                BMC Med Inform Decis Mak
                BMC Med Inform Decis Mak
                BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making
                BioMed Central (London )
                1472-6947
                16 July 2016
                16 July 2016
                2016
                : 16
                : 93
                Affiliations
                Canada Health Infoway-Inforoute Santé du Canada, 150 King St. W., Ste 1300, Toronto, M5H 1 J9 ON Canada
                Author information
                http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2666-3585
                Article
                330
                10.1186/s12911-016-0330-3
                4947362
                27422571
                de335770-da3d-48da-bc95-607039e87b69
                © The Author(s). 2016

                Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.

                History
                : 1 March 2016
                : 3 July 2016
                Categories
                Research Article
                Custom metadata
                © The Author(s) 2016

                Bioinformatics & Computational biology
                electronic health records,health information exchange,evaluation,benefits,interoperability

                Comments

                Comment on this article