A comparison of electronic health records at two major Peking University Hospitals in China to United States meaningful use objectives

BACKGROUND: In accordance with the People’s Republic of China’s (China) National Health Reform Plan of 2009, two of the nation’s leading hospitals, located in Beijing, have implemented electronic medical record (EMR) systems from different vendors. To inform future EMR adoption and policy in China, as well as informatics research in the US, this study compared the United State’s Hospital Meaningful Use (MU) Objectives (phase 1) objectives to the EMR functionality of two early hospital EMR adopters in China. METHODS: At both hospitals, the researchers observed a physician using the EMR and noted MU functionality that was seen and functionality that was not seen yet was available in the EMR. The information technology department was asked about the availability of functionality neither observed nor known to the physician. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: Approximately half the MU objectives were available in each EMR. Some differences between the EMRs in the study and MU objectives were attributed to operational differences between the health systems and the cultures in the two countries

Functional Assessment Data: Current Status of Federal Initiatives to Support Interoperability among Post Acute Care Settings

Health information needed along the transitions in care includes functional status such as self-care abilities assessments. Despite current federal efforts to support interoperability of functional status data, gaps still exist. Functional status assessments are included in data collection instruments widely used in four post acute care (PAC) settings, with each type of setting using a different standard instrument. These various instruments lack a shared standard for the content (meaning) of functional assessment items, necessitating mapping to a standard data terminology. Analysis indicates complete LOINC representation and incomplete SNOMED representation among functional status items and instruments. The new U.S. Core Data for Interoperability (USCDI) data standard has not included functional status in the next version to be adopted due in part to insufficiently defined use cases. The Post-Acute Care Interoperability Workgroup (PACIO) produced a FHIR implementation guide for functional status based on a use case. Gaps persist in PAC interoperability adoption

Artificial Intelligence in Nursing: Perspectives from Norwegian Nurses

Nurses continue to face challenges in leading health information technology innovations such as Artificial Intelligence (AI). There is an acknowledged need to explore the attitude of nurses towards AI and nurses’ acceptance of AI in clinical settings. We sought to address this gap in knowledge about the perceptions of AI by nursing-related professionals in their work and as a content area in the education of nursing students. Norwegian nurses and healthcare personnel interested in the topic met in a seminar in Oslo in 2023 to explore their perspectives on AI. Following a lecture on AI, audience members offered their insights in a recorded discussion. Data analysis consisted of inductive coding of concepts in the transcribed recording. Three major themes emerged: Expectations, Identified needs and related recommendations; and Policy to guard safety; as well as recommendations new to the literature.publishedVersio

Transitions of Care: Completeness of the Interoperability Data Standard for Communication from Home Health Care to Primary Care.

Data sharing is necessary to address communication deficits along the transitions of care among community settings. Evidence-based practice supports home healthcare (HHC) patients to see their primary care team within the first two weeks of hospital discharge to reduce rehospitalization risk. A small subset of patient data collected at HHC admission is mandated to be transmitted to primary care, predominantly by fax. Using qualitative analysis, we assessed completeness of the United States Core Data for Interoperability (USCDI) interoperability standard, as compared to the patient data collected by the primary care team (topics) and HHC (classes) during the initial visit; and offer interoperability recommendations. Findings indicate the USCDI does not cover 74% of the 19 faxed HHC classes that mapped to the primary care topics, and 95% of the 38 not-faxed HHC classes. We offer USCDI recommendations to address these interoperability gaps

Addressing the Gap in Data Communication from Home Health Care to Primary Care during Care Transitions: Completeness of an Interoperability Data Standard

In a future where home health care is no longer an information silo, patient information will be communicated along transitions in care to improve care. Evidence-based practice in the United States supports home health care patients to see their primary care team within the first two weeks of hospital discharge to reduce rehospitalization risk. We sought to identify a parsimonious set of home health care data to be communicated to primary care for the post-hospitalization visit. Anticipating electronic dataset communication, we investigated the completeness of the international reference terminology, Logical Observation Identifiers Names and Codes (LOINC), for coverage of the data to be communicated. We conducted deductive qualitative analysis in three steps: (1) identify home health care data available for the visit by mapping home health care to the information needed for the visit; (2) reduce the resulting home health care data set to a parsimonious set clinicians wanted for the post-hospitalization visit by eliciting primary care clinician input; and (3) map the parsimonious dataset to LOINC and assess LOINC completeness. Our study reduced the number of standardized home health care assessment questions by 40% to a parsimonious set of 33 concepts that primary care team physicians wanted for the post-hospitalization visit. Findings indicate all home health care concepts in the parsimonious dataset mapped to the information needed for the post-hospitalization visit, and 84% of the home health care concepts mapped to a LOINC term. The results indicate data flow of parsimonious home health care dataset to primary care for the post-hospitalization visit is possible using existing LOINC codes, and would require adding some codes to LOINC for communication of a complete parsimonious data set

Implementation outcome instruments for use in physical healthcare settings: a systematic review

BACKGROUND: Implementation research aims to facilitate the timely and routine implementation and sustainment of evidence-based interventions and services. A glaring gap in this endeavour is the capability of researchers, healthcare practitioners and managers to quantitatively evaluate implementation efforts using psychometrically sound instruments. To encourage and support the use of precise and accurate implementation outcome measures, this systematic review aimed to identify and appraise studies that assess the measurement properties of quantitative implementation outcome instruments used in physical healthcare settings. METHOD: The following data sources were searched from inception to March 2019, with no language restrictions: MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, HMIC, CINAHL and the Cochrane library. Studies that evaluated the measurement properties of implementation outcome instruments in physical healthcare settings were eligible for inclusion. Proctor et al.'s taxonomy of implementation outcomes was used to guide the inclusion of implementation outcomes: acceptability, appropriateness, feasibility, adoption, penetration, implementation cost and sustainability. Methodological quality of the included studies was assessed using the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) checklist. Psychometric quality of the included instruments was assessed using the Contemporary Psychometrics checklist (ConPsy). Usability was determined by number of items per instrument. RESULTS: Fifty-eight publications reporting on the measurement properties of 55 implementation outcome instruments (65 scales) were identified. The majority of instruments assessed acceptability (n = 33), followed by appropriateness (n = 7), adoption (n = 4), feasibility (n = 4), penetration (n = 4) and sustainability (n = 3) of evidence-based practice. The methodological quality of individual scales was low, with few studies rated as 'excellent' for reliability (6/62) and validity (7/63), and both studies that assessed responsiveness rated as 'poor' (2/2). The psychometric quality of the scales was also low, with 12/65 scales scoring 7 or more out of 22, indicating greater psychometric strength. Six scales (6/65) rated as 'excellent' for usability. CONCLUSION: Investigators assessing implementation outcomes quantitatively should select instruments based on their methodological and psychometric quality to promote consistent and comparable implementation evaluations. Rather than developing ad hoc instruments, we encourage further psychometric testing of instruments with promising methodological and psychometric evidence. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO 2017 CRD42017065348

Confronting and Resolving an Ethical Dilemma Associated with a Practice Based Evaluation Using Observational Methodology of Health Information Technology

SummaryAs the adoption of health information technology (HIT) has escalated, efforts to evaluate its uptake have increased. The evaluation of HIT often requires direct observation of health care practitioners interacting with the system. When in the field, the evaluator who is not a trained health care provider may observe suboptimal use of the technology. If evaluators have plans to share the results of the evaluation at the conclusion of the study, they face a decision point about whether to disclose interim results and the implications of doing so. To provide HIT evaluators with guidance about what issues to weigh when observing the implementation of HIT, this paper presents a study of an actual case and discusses the following considerations: (1) whether the evaluation of HIT is considered to be human subject research; (2) if the evaluation is human subject research, whether the Institutional Review Board will consider it exempt from review or subjected to expedited or full review; and (3) how interim disclosure to the clinic management impacts the research study. The recommendations to evaluators include use of a protocol for interim disclosures to patients, clinicians, and/or clinical management for both quality assurance initiatives and human subjects research.</jats:p