CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 · Methods Inf Med
DOI: 10.1055/s-0040-1715796
Original Article

International Comparison of Six Basic eHealth Indicators Across 14 Countries: An eHealth Benchmarking Study

Elske Ammenwerth
1  Institute of Medical Informatics, University for Health Sciences, Medical Informatics and Technology (UMIT), Hall in Tirol, Austria
,
Georg Duftschmid
2  Section for Medical Information Management, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
,
Zaid Al-Hamdan
3  Faculty of Nursing/WHO Collaborating Center, Jordan University of Science and Technology, Irbid, Jordan
,
Hala Bawadi
4  Maternal and Child Health Nursing Department, The University of Jordan, Amman, Jordan
,
Ngai T. Cheung
5  Hospital Authority, Hong Kong
,
Kyung-Hee Cho
6  Seoul National University, Korea
,
Guillermo Goldfarb
7  Medical Informatics, Hospital de Niños Ricardo Gutiérrez, Ciudad Autónoma de Buenos Aires, Buenos Aires, Argentina
,
Kemal H. Gülkesen
8  Department of Biostatistics and Medical Informatics, Medical Faculty, Akdeniz University, Antalya, Turkey
,
Nissim Harel
9  Department of Computer Science, Holon Institute of Technology, Holon, Israel
,
Michio Kimura
10  Medical Informatics Department, School of Medicine, Hamamatsu University, Shizuoka, Japan
,
Önder Kırca
11  Department of Clinical Oncology, Memorial and Medstar Oncology Center, Antalya, Turkey
,
Hiroshi Kondoh
12  Department of Medical Informatics, Tottori University Hospital, Yonago, Japan
,
Sabine Koch
13  Department of Learning, Informatics, Management and Ethics, Health Informatics Centre, KarolinskaInstitutet, Stockholm, Sweden
,
Hadas Lewy
14  Digital Health Ventures, Holon Institute of Technology, Holon, Israel
,
Dara Mize
15  Department of Biomedical Informatics, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, Tennessee, United States
,
Sari Palojoki
16  Department of Health and Social Management, University of Eastern Finland, Kuopio, Finland
,
Hyeoun-Ae Park
17  College of Nursing, Seoul National University, Seoul, South Korea
,
Christopher Pearce
18  Director of Research, Outcome Health, Blackburn, Australia
,
Fernan G. B. de Quirós
19  Department of Health Informatics, Hospital Italiano de Buenos Aires, Buenos Aires, Argentina
,
Kaija Saranto
20  Department of Health and Social Management, University of Eastern Finland, Kuopio, Finland
,
Christoph Seidel
21  Division of eHealth, Digitalisation and Social Health Economy, Lower Saxony Ministry for Social Affairs, Health and Equal Opportunities, Hannover, Germany
,
Vivian Vimarlund
22  Department of Computer and Information Science, Linköping University, Linköping, Sweden
,
Martin C. Were
23  Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee, United States
,
Johanna Westbrook
24  Centre for Health Systems and Safety Research, Australian Institute of Health Innovation, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Macquarie University, Macquarie, Australia
,
Chung P. Wong
25  Hong Kong Society of Medical Informatics, Hong Kong
,
Reinhold Haux*
26  Peter L. Reichertz Institute for Medical Informatics, TU Braunschweig and Hannover Medical School, Braunschweig, Germany
,
Christoph U. Lehmann*
27  Clinical Informatics Center, Department of Pediatrics, Bioinformatics, and Population and Data Sciences, University of Texas Southwestern, Dallas, Texas, United States
› Author Affiliations
  

Abstract

Background Many countries adopt eHealth applications to support patient-centered care. Through information exchange, these eHealth applications may overcome institutional data silos and support holistic and ubiquitous (regional or national) information logistics. Available eHealth indicators mostly describe usage and acceptance of eHealth in a country. The eHealth indicators focusing on the cross-institutional availability of patient-related information for health care professionals, patients, and care givers are rare.

Objectives This study aims to present eHealth indicators on cross-institutional availability of relevant patient data for health care professionals, as well as for patients and their caregivers across 14 countries (Argentina, Australia, Austria, Finland, Germany, Hong Kong as a special administrative region of China, Israel, Japan, Jordan, Kenya, South Korea, Sweden, Turkey, and the United States) to compare our indicators and the resulting data for the examined countries with other eHealth benchmarks and to extend and explore changes to a comparable survey in 2017. We defined “availability of patient data” as the ability to access data in and to add data to the patient record in the respective country.

Methods The invited experts from each of the 14 countries provided the indicator data for their country to reflect the situation on August 1, 2019, as date of reference. Overall, 60 items were aggregated to six eHealth indicators.

Results Availability of patient-related information varies strongly by country. Health care professionals can access patients' most relevant cross-institutional health record data fully in only four countries. Patients and their caregivers can access their health record data fully in only two countries. Patients are able to fully add relevant data only in one country. Finland showed the best outcome of all eHealth indicators, followed by South Korea, Japan, and Sweden.

Conclusion Advancement in eHealth depends on contextual factors such as health care organization, national health politics, privacy laws, and health care financing. Improvements in eHealth indicators are thus often slow. However, our survey shows that some countries were able to improve on at least some indicators between 2017 and 2019. We anticipate further improvements in the future.

* Joint senior authorship.




Publication History

Received: 14 March 2020

Accepted: 21 June 2020

Publication Date:
18 November 2020 (online)

© 2020. The Author(s). This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonDerivative-NonCommercial License, permitting copying and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit. Contents may not be used for commercial purposes, or adapted, remixed, transformed or built upon. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)

Georg Thieme Verlag KG
Rüdigerstraße 14, 70469 Stuttgart, Germany