Enhancing the Capacity of Community Health Centers to Achieve High Performance

Based on a survey of community health centers, assesses access to care, care coordination, quality improvement efforts, health information technology adoption, and ability to serve as patient-centered medical homes. Suggests policy to strengthen clinics

Guiding Transformation: How Medical Practices Can Become Patient-Centered Medical Homes

Describes in detail eight change concepts as a guide to transforming a practice into a patient-centered medical home, including engaged leadership, quality improvement strategy, continuous and team-based healing relationships, and enhanced access

Improving the Use of Electronic Medical Records in Primary Health Care: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Electronic Medical Records were first introduced in the 1970s to organize patient information, improve coordination of care, and improve communication. The purpose of this systematic review was to identify interventions aimed at improving EMR use in primary health care settings. Of 2,098 identified studies twelve were included in the review. Results showed that interventions focused on the use of EMR functions were five times more likely to show improvements in EMR use compared to controls. Interventions focused on data quality were five and a half times more likely to show improvements in EMR use compared to controls. Individuals in primary health care settings aiming to improve EMR use would benefit from implementing interventions focused on EMR feature add-ons, and provisions of educational materials, or financial incentives targeted at improving the use of EMR functions and data quality

Integrating Clinical Decision Support into Workflow

Purpose: The aims were to (1) identify barriers and facilitators related to integration of clinical decision support (CDS) into workflow and (2) develop and test CDS design alternatives. Scope: To better understand CDS integration, we studied its use in practice, focusing on CDS for colorectal cancer (CRC) screening and followup. Phase 1 involved outpatient clinics of four different systems—120 clinic staff and providers and 118 patients were observed. In Phase 2, prototyped design enhancements to the Veterans Administration’s CRC screening reminder were compared against its current reminder in a simulation experiment. Twelve providers participated. Methods: Phase 1 was a qualitative project, using key informant interviews, direct observation, opportunistic interviews, and focus groups. All data were analyzed using a coding template, based on the sociotechnical systems theory, which was modified as coding proceeded and themes emerged. Phase 2 consisted of rapid prototyping of CDS design alternatives based on Phase 1 findings and a simulation experiment to test these design changes in a within-subject comparison. Results: Very different CDS types existed across sites, yet there are common barriers: (1) lack of coordination of “outside” results and between primary and specialty care; (2) suboptimal data organization and presentation; (3) needed provider and patient education; (4) needed interface flexibility; (5) needed technological enhancements; (6) unclear role assignments; (7) organizational issues; and (8) disconnect with quality reporting. Design enhancements positively impacted usability and workflow integration but not workload. Conclusions: Effective CDS design and integration requires: (1) organizational and workflow integration; (2) integrating outside results; (3) improving data organization and presentation in a flexible interface; and (4) providing just-in time education, cognitive support, and quality reporting

Do computerised clinical decision support systems for prescribing change practice? A systematic review of the literature (1990-2007)

Computerised clinical decision support systems (CDSSs) are used widely to improve quality of care and patient outcomes. This systematic review evaluated the impact of CDSSs in targeting specific aspects of prescribing, namely initiating, monitoring and stopping therapy. We also examined the influence of clinical setting (institutional vs ambulatory care), system- or user-initiation of CDSS, multi-faceted vs stand alone CDSS interventions and clinical target on practice changes in line with the intent of the CDSS. We searched Medline, Embase and PsychINFO for publications from 1990-2007 detailing CDSS prescribing interventions. Pairs of independent reviewers extracted the key features and prescribing outcomes of methodologically adequate studies (experiments and strong quasi-experiments). 56 studies met our inclusion criteria, 38 addressing initiating, 23 monitoring and three stopping therapy. At the time of initiating therapy, CDSSs appear to be somewhat more effective after, rather than before, drug selection has occurred (7/12 versus 12/26 studies reporting statistically significant improvements in favour of CDSSs on = 50% of prescribing outcomes reported). CDSSs also appeared to be effective for monitoring therapy, particularly using laboratory test reminders (4/7 studies reporting significant improvements in favour of CDSSs on the majority of prescribing outcomes). None of the studies addressing stopping therapy demonstrated impacts in favour of CDSSs over comparators. The most consistently effective approaches used system-initiated advice to fine-tune existing therapy by making recommendations to improve patient safety, adjust the dose, duration or form of prescribed drugs or increase the laboratory testing rates for patients on long-term therapy. CDSSs appeared to perform better in institutional compared to ambulatory settings and when decision support was initiated automatically by the system as opposed to user initiation. CDSSs implemented with other strategies such as education were no more successful in improving prescribing than stand alone interventions. Cardiovascular disease was the most studied clinical target but few studies demonstrated significant improvements on the majority of prescribing outcomes. Our understanding of CDSS impacts on specific aspects of the prescribing process remains relatively limited. Future implementation should build on effective approaches including the use of system-initiated advice to address safety issues and improve the monitoring of therapy

The perceived benefits of healthcare information technology adoption: construct and survey development

This paper is a part of a large study, which examines healthcare professionals’ attitudes regarding the adoption, use and perceived benefits of healthcare information technology (HIT). To date, literature on HIT has shown many important benefits related to quality and efficiency as well as limitations related to generalization and to a lack of empirical data on benefits. The aim of this paper is to develop a survey instrument focused the perceived benefits of HIT adoption. We exhaustively reviewed the construct of perceived benefits in various research areas to identify established approaches to predicting individual’s intentions to adopt technology. The items of perceived benefits taken from previous studies were developed and modified, and three benefit dimensions (direct, indirect and strategic benefits) were described. The questionnaire addressed the following issues: demographic information, perceived benefits of computerized physician/provider order entry (CPOE), and intent to adopt CPOE. We present a survey instrument containing the perceived benefits construct targeting healthcare executives. This is developed and validated by the translational validity test that attempts to assess the degree to which we accurately translated our construct into the operationalization. The Importance of the instrument for perceived benefits of HIT adoption as well as its limitations is also presented

Health Information Technology in the United States, 2008

Provides updated survey data on health information technology (HIT) and electronic health records adoption, with a focus on providers serving vulnerable populations. Examines assessments of HIT's effect on the cost and quality of care and emerging issues

Factors Associated with Ordering and Completion of Laboratory Monitoring Tests for High-Risk Medications in the Ambulatory Setting: A Dissertation

Since the Institute of Medicine highlighted the devastating impact of medical errors in their seminal report, “To Err is Human” (2000), efforts have been underway to improve patient safety. A portion of medical errors are due to medication errors, and a large portion of these can be attributed to inadequate laboratory monitoring. In this thesis, I attempt to address this small but important corner of this patient safety endeavor. Why are patients not getting their laboratory monitoring tests? Do they fail to complete them or do doctors not order the tests in the first place? Which prescribers and which patients are least likely to do what is needed for testing to happen and what interventions would be most promising? To address these questions, I conducted a systematic review of existing interventions. I then proceeded with three aims: 1) To identify reasons that patients give for missing monitoring tests; 2) To identify patient and provider factors associated with monitoring test ordering; and 3) To identify patient and provider factors associated with completion of ordered testing. To achieve these aims, I worked with patients and data at the Fallon Clinic. For aim 1, I conducted a qualitative analysis of their reasons for missing tests as well as reporting completion and ordering rates. For aims 2 and 3, I used electronic medical record data and conducted a regression with patient and provider characteristics as covariates to identify factors contributing to test ordering and completion. Interviews revealed that patients had few barriers to completion, with forgetting being the most common reason for missing a test. The quantitative studies showed that: older patients with more interactions with the health care system were more likely to have tests ordered and were more likely to complete them; providers who more frequently prescribe a drug were more likely to order testing for it; and drug-test combinations that were particularly dangerous, indicated by a black box warning, were more likely to have appropriate ordering, though for these combinations, primary care providers were less likely to order tests appropriately, and patients were less likely to complete tests. Taken together, my work can inform future interventions in laboratory monitoring and patient safety