Design, Development, and Evaluation of an Automated Solution for Electronic Information Exchange Between Acute and Long-term Postacute Care Facilities: Design Science Research
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Information exchange is essential for transitioning high-quality care between care settings. Inadequate or delayed information exchange can result in medication errors, missed test results, considerable delays in care, and even readmissions. Unfortunately, long-term and postacute care facilities often lag behind other health care facilities in adopting health information technologies, increasing difficulty in facilitating care transitions through electronic information exchange. The research gap is most evident when considering the implications of the inability to electronically transfer patients' health records between these facilities. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to design and evaluate an open standards-based interoperability solution that facilitates seamless bidirectional information exchange between acute care and long-term and postacute care facilities using 2 vendor electronic health record (EHR) systems. METHODS: Using the design science research methodology, we designed an interoperability solution that improves the bidirectional information exchange between acute care and long-term care (LTC) facilities using different EHR systems. Different approaches were applied in the study with a focus on the relevance cycle, including eliciting detailed requirements from stakeholders in the health system who understand the complex data formats, constraints, and workflows associated with transferring patient records between 2 different EHR systems. We performed literature reviews and sought experts in the health care industry from different organizations with a focus on the rigor cycle to identify the components relevant to the interoperability solution. The design cycle focused on iterating between the core activities of implementing and evaluating the proposed artifact. The artifact was evaluated at a health care organization with a combined footprint of acute and postacute care operations using 2 different EHR systems. RESULTS: The resulting interoperability solution offered integrations with source systems and was proven to facilitate bidirectional information exchange for patients transferring between an acute care facility using an Epic EHR system and an LTC facility using a PointClickCare EHR system. This solution serves as a proof of concept for bidirectional data exchange between Epic and PointClickCare for medications, yet the solution is designed to expand to additional data elements such as allergies, problem lists, and diagnoses. CONCLUSIONS: Historically, the interoperability topic has centered on hospital-to-hospital data exchange, making it more challenging to evaluate the efficacy of data exchange between other care settings. In acute and LTC settings, there are differences in patients' needs and delivery of care workflows that are distinctly unique. In addition, the health care system's components that offer long-term and acute care in the United States have evolved independently and separately. This study demonstrates that the interoperability solution improves the information exchange between acute and LTC facilities by simplifying data transfer, eliminating manual processes, and reducing data discrepancies using a design science research methodology.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.050 | 0.050 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".