1 Broad and Cassel, Attorneys at Law, Fort Lauderdale, Florida.
2 Oregon Health & Science University School of Medicine, Portland, Oregon.
J Manag Care Spec Pharm. 2017 Nov;23(11):1130-1139. doi: 10.18553/jmcp.2017.23.11.1130.
Little research has been conducted on the quality, benefits, costs, and financial considerations associated with health information technology (HIT), particularly informatics technologies such as e-prescribing, from the perspective of all of its stakeholders.
To (a) identify the stakeholders involved in e-prescribing and (b) identify and rank order the positives and negatives of e-prescribing from the perspective of stakeholders in order to create a framework for payers, integrated delivery systems, policymakers and legislators, and those who influence public policy to assist them in the development of incentives and payment mechanisms that result in the better management of care.
The Delphi method was used to enlist a panel of experts in e-prescribing, informatics, and/or HIT who have published in the field. This panel was presented with the results of initial research and an online survey of questions that sought to prioritize the quality, benefit, cost, and financial effects of e-prescribing from the perspective of each stakeholder. Eleven experts completed the first survey, which contained a list of stakeholders and positives and negatives associated with e-prescribing. Nine of the 11 experts completed the second survey, and 7 experts completed the final survey. From the results of these 3 surveys, a framework was presented to 5 framework experts, who were representatives from payers, integrated delivery systems, policymakers and legislators, and those who influence public policy. These framework experts were interviewed regarding the usefulness of the framework from their perspectives.
The experts added stakeholders and many positives and negatives to the initial list and rank ordered the positives and negatives of e-prescribing from the perspective of each stakeholder. The aggregate results were summarized by stakeholder category. The positives and negatives were categorized as health, finance, effort, time, management, or data concerns. The framework experts evaluated the framework and found it useful.
Positives and negatives associated with e-prescribing in the areas of quality, benefits, costs, and financial considerations can be rank ordered from the perspective of each stakeholder. The experts agreed on some points but disagreed on others. For example, they agreed that the main negative of e-prescribing from the perspective of pharmacists and pharmacies was its implementation costs but differed on the importance of providing faster information transfer. A framework was created that could be successfully used by payers, integrated delivery systems, policymakers and legislators, and those who influence public policy for the development of incentives and payment mechanisms.
This research was supported by the National Library of Medicine of the National Institutes of Health under Award Number T15LM007088. The authors declare no conflicts of interest in the research. Study concept and design were contributed by DeMuro, Ash, Middleton, and Fletcher. DeMuro took the lead in data collection, along with Ash, and data interpretation was performed by DeMuro, Ash, Madison, Middleton, and Fletcher. The manuscript was written primarily by DeMuro, along with Ash and Middleton, and revised by DeMuro, Madison, and Ash, along with Middleton and Fletcher.
从所有利益相关者的角度来看,关于医疗信息技术(HIT)的质量、效益、成本和财务考虑因素的研究很少,特别是电子处方等信息学技术。
(a)确定电子处方涉及的利益相关者,(b)从利益相关者的角度确定和排列电子处方的优缺点,以创建一个框架,以便支付者、综合交付系统、政策制定者和立法者以及影响公共政策的人能够制定激励措施和支付机制,从而更好地管理护理。
采用德尔菲法(Delphi method)招募了一组在电子处方、信息学和/或 HIT 领域有出版经验的专家。该小组提交了初步研究结果和在线调查结果,这些结果旨在从每个利益相关者的角度确定电子处方的质量、效益、成本和财务影响的优先级。11 名专家完成了第一次调查,其中包括一份与电子处方相关的利益相关者和优缺点清单。11 名专家中有 9 名完成了第二次调查,7 名完成了第三次调查。根据这 3 次调查的结果,向 5 名框架专家(代表支付者、综合交付系统、政策制定者和立法者以及影响公共政策的人)提交了一个框架。这些框架专家根据他们的观点对框架的有用性进行了采访。
专家们在初始清单中添加了利益相关者和许多优点和缺点,并从每个利益相关者的角度对电子处方的优缺点进行了排序。汇总结果按利益相关者类别进行了总结。优点和缺点分为健康、财务、工作、时间、管理或数据问题。框架专家评估了框架,并认为它很有用。
可以从每个利益相关者的角度对电子处方在质量、效益、成本和财务方面的优缺点进行排序。专家们在某些问题上达成了一致,但在其他问题上存在分歧。例如,他们一致认为从药剂师和药店的角度来看,电子处方的主要缺点是实施成本,但在提供更快的信息传递的重要性上存在分歧。创建了一个框架,支付者、综合交付系统、政策制定者和立法者以及影响公共政策的人可以成功地使用该框架来制定激励措施和支付机制。
这项研究得到了美国国立卫生研究院国家医学图书馆的资助,资助编号为 T15LM007088。作者在研究中没有利益冲突。DeMuro、Ash、Madison 和 Middleton 为研究概念和设计做出了贡献。DeMuro 与 Ash 一起主导了数据收集,数据解释由 DeMuro、Ash、Madison、Middleton 和 Fletcher 完成。主要由 DeMuro 与 Ash 和 Middleton 共同撰写了这份手稿,并由 DeMuro、Madison 和 Ash 与 Middleton 和 Fletcher 共同修订。