Interest in Health Information Exchange in Ambulatory Care: A Statewide Survey
02 November 2009
accepted after major revision: 18 January 2010
15 November 2017 (online)
Objective: Assess the interest in and preferences of ambulatory practitioners in HIE.
Background: Health information exchange (HIE) may improve the quality and efficiency of care. Identifying the value proposition for smaller ambulatory practices may help those practices engage in HIE.
Methods: Survey of primary care and specialist practitioners in the State of Colorado.
Results: Clinical data were commonly (always [2%], often [29%] or sometimes [49%]) missing during clinic visits. Of 12 data types proposed as available through HIE, ten were considered “extremely useful” by most practitioners. “Clinical notes/consultation reports,” “diagnosis or problem lists,” and “hospital discharge summaries” were considered the three most useful data types. Interest in EKG reports, diagnosis/problem lists, childhood immunizations, and discharge summaries differed among ambulatory practitioner groups (primary care, obstetrics-gynecology, and internal medicine subspecialties).
Conclusion: Practitioners express strong interest in most of the data types, but opinions differed by specialties on what types were most important. All providers felt that a system that provided all data types would be useful. These results support the potential benefit of HIE in ambulatory practices.
- 1 Aaron HJ. Budget crisis, entitlement crisis, health care financing problem which is it?. Health Aff 2007; 26: 1622-1633.
- 2 World Health Organization. Lerberghe Wv. Primary health care: now more than ever. Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization; 2008
- 3 Institute of Medicine (U.S.). Committee on Quality of Health Care in America. Crossing the quality chasm: a new health system for the 21st century. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press; 2001
- 4 Walker J. et al. The value of health care information exchange and interoperability. Health Aff. 2005 January 19, 2005:hlthaff.w5.10.
- 5 The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009. 2009 [cited 2010 January 25]; Available from: http://www.recovery.gov/About/Pages/The_Act.aspx
- 6 eHealth Initiative Fifth Annual Survey of Health Information Exchange At the State and Local Levels. 2009 [cited 2010 January 25]; Available from: http://www.ehealthinitiative.org/sites/default/files/eHI-HIESurveyResultsFinalReport-2008.pdf
- 7 DesRoches CM. et al. Electronic health records in ambulatory care–a national survey of physicians. N Engl J Med 2008; 359: 50-60.
- 8 Nyweide DJ. et al. Relationship of primary care physicians’ patient caseload with measurement of quality and cost performance. JAMA 2009; 302: 2444-2450.
- 9 Adler-Milstein J, Landefeld J, Jha AK. Characteristics associated with regional health information organization viability. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2010; 17: 61-65.
- 10 Shapiro JS. et al The New York clinical information exchange clinical advisory S. emergency physicians’ perceptions of health information exchange. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2007; 14: 700-705.
- 11 Miller RH, Miller BS. The Santa Barbara county care data exchange: What happened?. Health Aff 2007; 26: w568-w580.
- 12 Brailer DJ. From Santa Barbara to Washington: A person‘s and a nation‘s journey toward portable health information. Health Aff 2007; 26: w581-w588.
- 13 Grossman JM, Bodenheimer TS, McKenzie K. Hospital-physician portals: The role of competition in driving clinical data exchange. Health Aff 2006; 25: 1629-1636.
- 14 Adler-Milstein J. et al. The state of regional health information organizations: current activities and financing. Health Aff 2008; 27: w60-w69.
- 15 Grossman JM, Kushner KL, November EA. Creating sustainable local health information exchanges: can barriers to stakeholder participation be overcome?. Res Briefs 2008; 2: 1-12.
- 16 Marchibroda JM. Health information exchange policy and evaluation. Journal of Biomedical Informatics 2007; 40 (Suppl. 01) S11-S6.
- 17 Smith PC. et al. Missing clinical information during primary care visits. JAMA 2005; 293: 565-571.
- 18 AHRQ. Health information technology: state and regional demonstration projects. February 2007 [cited 2009 April 30]; Available from: http://www.ahrq.gov/research/hitdemoproj.htm
- 19 Simon SR. et al. Physicians and electronic health records: A statewide survey. Arch Intern Med 2007; 167: 507-512.
- 20 ASTM. ASTM E2369 - 05e1 Standard specification for continuity of care record (CCR). West Conshohocken, PA: ASTM International; 2005
- 21 Frohlich J. et al. Retrospective: lessons learned from the Santa Barbara project and their implications for health information exchange. Health Aff 2007; 26: w589-w591.
- 22 Office of the National Coordinator. Meaningful Use. 2009 [cited 2010 January 10]; Available from: http://healthit.hhs.gov/portal/server.pt?open=512&objID=1325&parentname=CommunityPage&parentid=1&mode=2