Successes and Barriers of Health Information Exchange Participation Across Hospitals in South Carolina From 2014 to 2020: Longitudinal Observational Study
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: The 2009 Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health Act sets three stages of Meaningful Use requirements for the electronic health records incentive program. Health information exchange (HIE) technologies are critical in the meaningful use of electronic health records to support patient care coordination. However, HIE use trends and barriers remain unclear across hospitals in South Carolina (SC), a state with the earliest HIE implementation. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to explore changes in the proportion of HIE participation and factors associated with HIE participation, and barriers to exchange and interoperability across SC hospitals. METHODS: This study derived data from a longitudinal data set of the 2014-2020 American Hospital Association Information Technology Supplement for 69 SC hospitals. The primary outcome was whether a hospital participated in HIE in a year. A cross-sectional multivariable logistic regression model, clustered at the hospital level and weighted by bed size, was used to identify factors associated with HIE participation. The second outcome was barriers to sending, receiving, or finding patient health information to or from other organizations or hospital systems. The frequency of hospitals reporting each barrier related to exchange and interoperability were then calculated. RESULTS: Hospitals in SC have been increasingly participating in HIE, improving from 43% (24/56) in 2014 to 82% (54/66) in 2020. After controlling for other hospital factors, teaching hospitals (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] 3.7, 95% CI 1.0-13.3), system-affiliated hospitals (AOR 6.6, 95% CI 3.2-13.7), and rural referral hospitals (AOR 8.0, 95% CI 1.2-53.4) had higher odds to participate in HIE than their counterparts, whereas critical access hospitals (AOR 0.1, 95% CI 0.02-0.6) were less likely to participate in HIE than their counterparts reimbursed by the prospective payment system. Hospitals with greater ratios of Medicare or Medicaid inpatient days to total inpatient days also reported higher odds of HIE participation. Despite the majority of hospitals reporting HIE participation in 2020, barriers to exchange and interoperability remained, including lack of provider contacts (27/40, 68%), difficulty in finding patient health information (27/40, 68%), adapting different vendor platforms (26/40, 65%), difficulty matching or identifying same patients between systems (23/40, 58%), and providers that do not typically exchange patient data (23/40, 58%). CONCLUSIONS: HIE participation has been widely adopted in SC hospitals. Our findings highlight the need to incentivize optimization of HIE and seamless information exchange by facilitating and implementing standardization of health information across various HIE systems and by addressing other technical issues, including providing providers' addresses and training HIE stakeholders to find relevant information. Policies and efforts should include more collaboration with vendors to reduce platform compatibility issues and more user engagement and technical training and support to facilitate effective, accurate, and efficient exchange of provider contacts and patient health information.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,003 | 0,008 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,002 | 0,003 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,002 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».