Pylypchuk Yuriy, Alvarado Carla S, Patel Vaishali, Searcy Talisha
Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 330 C St SW, Floor 7, Washington, DC, 20201, USA.
National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine, Washington, DC, USA.
Healthc (Amst). 2019 Dec;7(4). doi: 10.1016/j.hjdsi.2019.04.001. Epub 2019 Apr 16.
Small hospitals significantly lag behind large hospitals in interoperable health information exchange. This analysis identifies factors that explain differences in interoperability between these hospital types. We place a particular emphasis on such factors as number of functionalities within electronic health record system (EHR), participation in regional and national networks, and adoption of a dominant EHR.
Using data from the 2017 American Hospital Association (AHA) Annual Survey Information Technology Supplement (n = 2789 hospitals), we applied a Blinder-Oaxaca decomposition technique to explain differences in each domain of interoperability. Interoperability is defined as a hospitals' ability to electronically send, receive, and integrate summary of care records into their EHR and electronically find patient health information from external sources.
The percentage of small and large hospitals engaged in each interoperability domain increased between 2015 and 2017; however, the gap between these hospital types remained mostly the same. Differences in characteristics explained most of the gap in integrating, finding and receiving the data while differences in characteristics and returns to characteristics were significant in explaining the differences in sending the data. The number of EHR functionalities and participation in national and regional networks were among largest contributors to the gap.
The lack of participation in multiple networks and the number of functionalities in EHRs among small hospitals are key factors that explain the difference in interoperability between small and large hospitals. Policies that incentivize these activities or simplify electronic exchange could reduce gaps in interoperability among hospitals of different sizes.
小型医院在可互操作的健康信息交换方面明显落后于大型医院。本分析确定了解释这些医院类型之间互操作性差异的因素。我们特别强调电子健康记录系统(EHR)中的功能数量、参与区域和国家网络以及采用占主导地位的EHR等因素。
利用2017年美国医院协会(AHA)年度调查信息技术补充资料(n = 2789家医院)中的数据,我们应用了布林德-奥萨卡分解技术来解释互操作性各领域的差异。互操作性定义为医院以电子方式发送、接收和将护理记录摘要整合到其EHR中,并从外部来源电子查找患者健康信息的能力。
2015年至2017年期间,参与每个互操作性领域的小型和大型医院的百分比有所增加;然而,这些医院类型之间的差距基本保持不变。特征差异解释了在整合、查找和接收数据方面的大部分差距,而特征差异和特征回报在解释发送数据的差异方面具有显著意义。EHR功能数量以及参与国家和区域网络是造成差距的最大因素。
小型医院缺乏参与多个网络以及EHR中的功能数量是解释小型和大型医院之间互操作性差异的关键因素。激励这些活动或简化电子交换的政策可以缩小不同规模医院之间的互操作性差距。