Download PDF
Appl Clin Inform 2021; 12(03): 564-572
DOI: 10.1055/s-0041-1731287
Research Article

Health Information Exchange between Specialists and General Practitioners Benefits Rural Patients

Masaharu Nakayama
1   Department of Medical Informatics, Tohoku University Graduate School of Medicine, Sendai, Japan
2   Medical Information Technology Center, Tohoku University Hospital, Sendai, Japan
,
Ryusuke Inoue
2   Medical Information Technology Center, Tohoku University Hospital, Sendai, Japan
,
Satoshi Miyata
3   Department of Biostatistics, Teikyo University Graduate School of Public Health, Tokyo, Japan
,
Hiroaki Shimizu
4   Department of Neurosurgery, Akita University Hospital, Akita, Japan
› Author Affiliations Funding This study received its financial support from The Japanese Agency for Medical Research and Development (grant number: JP17ek0210039h0003).
› Further Information
Also available at
   Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Background Health information exchange (HIE) may improve diagnostic accuracy, treatment efficacy, and safety by providing treating physicians with expert advice. However, most previous studies on HIE have been observational in nature.

Objectives To examine whether collaboration between specialists and general practitioners (GPs) in rural areas via HIE can improve outcomes among patients at low-to-moderate risk of cardiovascular disease, kidney disease, and stroke.

Methods In this randomized controlled trial, the Miyagi Medical and Welfare Information Network was used for HIE. We evaluated the clinical data of 1,092 patients aged ≥65 years living in the rural areas of the Miyagi Prefecture and receiving care from GPs only. High-risk patients were immediately referred to specialists, whereas low-to-moderate risk patients were randomly assigned to an intervention group in which GPs were advised by specialists through HIE (n = 518, 38% male, mean age = 76 ± 7 years) or a control group in which GPs received no advice by specialists (n = 521, 39% male, mean age = 75 ± 7 years).

Results In the intention-to-treat analysis, all-cause mortality and cumulative incidence of serious adverse events (e.g., hospital admission or unexpected referral to specialists) did not differ between the groups. However, per-protocol analysis controlling for GP adherence with specialist recommendations revealed significantly reduced all-cause mortality (p = 0.04) and cumulative serious adverse event incidence (p = 0.04) in the intervention group compared with the control group.

Conclusion HIE systems may improve outcomes among low-to-moderate risk patients by promoting greater collaboration between specialists and GPs, particularly in rural areas with few local specialists.

Keywords

cardiovascular disease - health information exchange - kidney disease - stroke

Protection of Human and Animal Subjects

The study was performed in compliance with the World Medical Association Declaration of Helsinki on Ethical Principles for Medical Research Involving Human Subjects and was reviewed by Tohoku University Ethics Committee and registered with the University Hospital Medical Information Network (UMIN) Clinical Trials Registry (UMIN000018552).




Publication History

Received: 15 February 2021

Accepted: 11 May 2021

Article published online:
09 June 2021

© 2021. Thieme. All rights reserved.

Georg Thieme Verlag KG
Rüdigerstraße 14, 70469 Stuttgart, Germany

 

  • References

  • 1 Furukawa MF, Patel V, Charles D, Swain M, Mostashari F. Hospital electronic health information exchange grew substantially in 2008-12. Health Aff (Millwood) 2013; 32 (08) 1346-1354
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 2 Holmgren AJ, Adler-Milstein J. Health information exchange in US hospitals: the current landscape and a path to improved information sharing. J Hosp Med 2017; 12 (03) 193-198
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 3 Kaelber DC, Bates DW. Health information exchange and patient safety. J Biomed Inform 2007; 40 (6, Suppl): S40-S45
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 4 Fontaine P, Ross SE, Zink T, Schilling LM. Systematic review of health information exchange in primary care practices. J Am Board Fam Med 2010; 23 (05) 655-670
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 5 Rahurkar S, Vest JR, Menachemi N. Despite the spread of health information exchange, there is little evidence of its impact on cost, use, and quality of care. Health Aff (Millwood) 2015; 34 (03) 477-483
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 6 Adler-Milstein J, Lin SC, Jha AK. The number of health information exchange efforts is declining, leaving the viability of broad clinical data exchange uncertain. Health Aff (Millwood) 2016; 35 (07) 1278-1285
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 7 Menachemi N, Rahurkar S, Harle CA, Vest JR. The benefits of health information exchange: an updated systematic review. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2018; 25 (09) 1259-1265
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 8 Ishigaki A, Higashi H, Sakamoto T, Shibahara S. The Great East-Japan Earthquake and devastating tsunami: an update and lessons from the past Great Earthquakes in Japan since 1923. Tohoku J Exp Med 2013; 229 (04) 287-299
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 9 Ido K, Nakamura N, Nakayama M. Miyagi Medical and Welfare Information Network: a backup system for patient clinical information after the Great East Japan Earthquake and Tsunami. Tohoku J Exp Med 2019; 248 (01) 19-25
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 10 Miyagi Medical and Welfare Information Network. Accessed January 12, 2021 at: http://mmwin.or.jp/
    PubMed
  • 11 Kimura M, Nakayasu K, Ohshima Y. et al. SS-MIX: a ministry project to promote standardized healthcare information exchange. Methods Inf Med 2011; 50 (02) 131-139
    Thieme ConnectPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 12 Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. Elderly population (indicator). 2019. Accessed December 1, 2020 at: https://data.oecd.org/pop/elderly-population.htm
    PubMed
  • 13 Statistics Bureau, Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications. Elderly People in Japan from a Statistical Viewpoint. 2018 Accessed June 1, 2020 at: https://www.stat.go.jp/data/topics/pdf/topics113-1.pdf
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 14 Gage BF, Waterman AD, Shannon W, Boechler M, Rich MW, Radford MJ. Validation of clinical classification schemes for predicting stroke: results from the National Registry of Atrial Fibrillation. JAMA 2001; 285 (22) 2864-2870
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 15 Haneda M, Noda M, Origasa H. et al; Japanese clinical practice guideline for diabetes 2016. Diabetol Int 2018; 9 (01) 1-45
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 16 Kinoshita M, Yokote K, Arai H. et al; Committee for Epidemiology and Clinical Management of Atherosclerosis. Japan Atherosclerosis Society (JAS) guidelines for prevention of atherosclerotic cardiovascular diseases 2017. J Atheroscler Thromb 2018; 25 (09) 846-984
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 17 Tsutsui H, Isobe M, Ito H. et al; Japanese Circulation Society and the Japanese Heart Failure Society Joint Working Group. JCS 2017/JHFS 2017 Guideline on diagnosis and treatment of acute and chronic heart failure- digest version. Circ J 2019; 83 (10) 2084-2184
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 18 Ishihara H, Suzuki M. Japanese guidelines for the management of stroke 2015: overview of the chapter on subarachnoid hemorrhage. Nihon Rinsho 2016; 74 (04) 677-680
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 19 Dixon BE, Schwartzkopf AL, Guerrero VM. et al. Regional data exchange to improve care for veterans after non-VA hospitalization: a randomized controlled trial. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak 2019; 19 (01) 125
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 20 Dai M, Peabody MR, Peterson LE. et al. Adherence to clinical guidelines for monitoring diabetes in primary care settings. Fam Med Community Health 2018; 6: 161-167
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 21 Doughty RN, Wright SP, Pearl A. et al. Randomized, controlled trial of integrated heart failure management: The Auckland Heart Failure Management Study. Eur Heart J 2002; 23 (02) 139-146
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 22 Smart NA, Titus TT. Outcomes of early versus late nephrology referral in chronic kidney disease: a systematic review. Am J Med 2011; 124 (11) 1073-80.e2
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 23 Gaitonde DY, Cook DL, Rivera IM. Chronic kidney disease: detection and evaluation. Am Fam Physician 2017; 96 (12) 776-783
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 24 Kirchhof P. The future of atrial fibrillation management: integrated care and stratified therapy. Lancet 2017; 390 (10105): 1873-1887
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 25 Mancia G, Fagard R, Narkiewicz K. et al. ESH/ESC guidelines for the management of arterial hypertension: the task force for the management of arterial hypertension of the European Society of Hypertension (ESH) and of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC). Eur Heart J 2013; 34 (28) 2159-2219
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 26 Hobbs FD, Erhardt L. Acceptance of guideline recommendations and perceived implementation of coronary heart disease prevention among primary care physicians in five European countries: the Reassessing European Attitudes about Cardiovascular Treatment (REACT) survey. Fam Pract 2002; 19 (06) 596-604
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 27 De Luca N, Izzo R, Iaccarino G. et al. The use of a telematic connection for the follow-up of hypertensive patients improves the cardiovascular prognosis. J Hypertens 2005; 23 (07) 1417-1423
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 28 Scalvini S, Rivadossi F, Comini L, Muiesan ML, Glisenti F. Telemedicine: the role of specialist second opinion for GPs in the care of hypertensive patients. Blood Press 2011; 20 (03) 158-165
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 29 Nakayama M, Takehana K, Kohro T, Matoba T, Tsutsui H, Nagai R. IHE Cardiology Team and SEAMAT Committee. Standard export data format for extension storage of standardized structured medical information exchange. Circ Rep 2020; 2 (10) 587-616
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 30 Everson J, Butler E. Hospital adoption of multiple health information exchange approaches and information accessibility. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2020; 27 (04) 577-583
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 31 Martin TJ, Ranney ML, Dorroh J, Asselin N, Sarkar IN. Health information exchange in emergency medical services. Appl Clin Inform 2018; 9 (04) 884-891
    Thieme ConnectPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 32 Kruse CS, Marquez G, Nelson D, Palomares O. The use of health information exchange to augment patient handoff in long-term care: a systematic review. Appl Clin Inform 2018; 9 (04) 752-771
    Thieme ConnectPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 33 Yaraghi N. An empirical analysis of the financial benefits of health information exchange in emergency departments. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2015; 22 (06) 1169-1172
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 34 Apathy NC, Holmgren AJ. Opt-in consent policies: potential barriers to hospital health information exchange. Am J Manag Care 2020; 26 (01) e14-e20
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 35 Vest JR, Unruh MA, Casalino LP, Shapiro JS. The complementary nature of query-based and directed health information exchange in primary care practice. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2020; 27 (01) 73-80
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 36 Payne TH, Lovis C, Gutteridge C. et al. Status of health information exchange: a comparison of six countries. J Glob Health 2019; 9 (02) 0204279
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 37 Boockvar KS, Ho W, Pruskowski J. et al. Effect of health information exchange on recognition of medication discrepancies is interrupted when data charges are introduced: results of a cluster-randomized controlled trial. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2017; 24 (06) 1095-1101
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 38 Murphy SM, Howell D, McPherson S, Grohs R, Roll J, Neven D. A randomized controlled trial of a citywide emergency department care-coordination program to reduce prescription opioid-related visits: an economic evaluation. J Emerg Med 2017; 53 (02) 186-194
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 39 Jung HY, Vest JR, Unruh MA, Kern LM, Kaushal R. HITEC Investigators. Use of health information exchange and repeat imaging costs. J Am Coll Radiol 2015; 12 (12 Pt B): 1364-1370
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar