Information Technology to Support Improved Care For Chronic Illness

BackgroundIn populations with chronic illness, outcomes improve with the use of care models that integrate clinical information, evidence-based treatments, and proactive management of care. Health information technology is believed to be critical for efficient implementation of these chronic care models. Health care organizations have implemented information technologies, such as electronic medical records, to varying degrees. However, considerable uncertainty remains regarding the relative impact of specific informatics technologies on chronic illness care.ObjectiveTo summarize knowledge and increase expert consensus regarding informatics components that support improvement in chronic illness care.DesignA systematic review of the literature was performed. "Use case" models were then developed, based on the literature review, and guidance from clinicians and national quality improvement projects. A national expert panel process was conducted to increase consensus regarding information system components that can be used to improve chronic illness care.ResultsThe expert panel agreed that informatics should be patient-centered, focused on improving outcomes, and provide support for illness self-management. They concurred that outcomes should be routinely assessed, provided to clinicians during the clinical encounter, and used for population-based care management. It was recommended that interactive, sequential, disorder-specific treatment pathways be implemented to quickly provide clinicians with patient clinical status, treatment history, and decision support.ConclusionsSpecific informatics strategies have the potential to improve care for chronic illness. Software to implement these strategies should be developed, and rigorously evaluated within the context of organizational efforts to improve care

The effect of provider- and workflow-focused strategies for guideline implementation on provider acceptance

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>The effective implementation of clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) depends critically on the extent to which the strategies that are deployed for implementing the guidelines promote provider acceptance of CPGs. Such implementation strategies can be classified into two types based on whether they primarily target providers (<it>e.g.</it>, academic detailing, grand rounds presentations) or the work context (<it>e.g.</it>, computer reminders, modifications to forms). This study investigated the independent and joint effects of these two types of implementation strategies on provider acceptance of CPGs.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Surveys were mailed to a national sample of providers (primary care physicians, physician assistants, nurses, and nurse practitioners) and quality managers selected from Veterans Affairs Medical Centers (VAMCs). A total of 2,438 providers and 242 quality managers from 123 VAMCs participated. Survey items measured implementation strategies and provider acceptance (<it>e.g.</it>, guideline-related knowledge, attitudes, and adherence) for three sets of CPGs--chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, chronic heart failure, and major depressive disorder. The relationships between implementation strategy types and provider acceptance were tested using multi-level analytic models.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>For all three CPGs, provider acceptance increased with the number of implementation strategies of either type. Moreover, the number of workflow-focused strategies compensated (contributing more strongly to provider acceptance) when few provider-focused strategies were used.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Provider acceptance of CPGs depends on the type of implementation strategies used. Implementation effectiveness can be improved by using both workflow-focused as well as provider-focused strategies.</p