Download PDF
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
T. Mäenpää
1   University of Tampere, School of Health Sciences, Nursing Science, Tampere, Finland
,
P. Asikainen
2   Administrative Head Nurse, Satakunta Hospital District, Pori, Finland
,
M. Gissler
3   THL National Institute for Health and Welfare, Finland & Nordic School of Public Health, Stockholm, Sweden
,
K. Siponen
4   University of Oulu, Department of Mathematics, Oulu, Finland
,
M. Maass
5   University of Turku, Department of Public Health, Turku, Finland
,
K. Saranto
6   University of Eastern Finland, Department of Health and Social Management, Kuopio, Finland
,
T. Suominen
1   University of Tampere, School of Health Sciences, Nursing Science, Tampere, Finland
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

received: 19 June 2010

accepted: 21 February 2010

Publication Date:
18 January 2018 (online)

    Permissions and Reprints

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
 

  • 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.
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 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.
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 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.
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 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.
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 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.
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 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.
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 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.
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 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.
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 9 Marchibroda JM. The impact of health information technology on collaborative chronic care management. J Manag Care Pharm 2008; 14 (02) 3-11.
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 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.
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 11 Tripathi M, Delano D, Lund B, Rudolph L. Engaging patients for health information exchange. Health Aff (Millwood) 2009; 28 (02) 435-443.
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 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.
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 13 Miller RH, Miller BS. The Santa Barbara County care data exchange: what happened?. Health Aff (Millwood) 2007; 26 (05) 568-580.
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 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.
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 15 Shapiro JS. Evaluating public health uses of health information exchange. J Biomed Inf 2007; 40 (06) 46-49.
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 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.
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 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.
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 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.
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 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.
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 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.
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 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.
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 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.
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 23 Scales DC, Laupacis A. Health technology assessment in critical care. Intensive Care Med 2007; 33 (12) 2183-2191.
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 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.
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 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.
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 26 Marchibroda JM. Health information exchange policy and evaluation. J Biomed Inform 2007; 40 (06) 11-16.
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 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.
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 28 Kaelber DC. Bates DW Health information exchange and patient safety. J Biomed Inform 2007; 40 (06) 40-45.
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 29 Vest JR. Health information exchange and health care utilization. J Med Syst 2009; 33 (03) 223-231.
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 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
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 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.
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 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.
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 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.
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 34 Freeman D. Pay for performance: a win for the NHIN?. Healthc Financ Manage 2005; 59 (08) 120-121.
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 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.
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 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.
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 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.
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 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.
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 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.
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 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.
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 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.
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 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.
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 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.
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 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.
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 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.
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 46 Ministry of Social Affairs and Health 2009. Social and health services. Health services. http://www.stm.fi/en/social_and_health_services
    PubMed
  • 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
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 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
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar