Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Factors Associated with Health Information Exchange System Usage in a Safety-Net Ambulatory Care Clinic Setting

  • ORIGINAL PAPER
  • Published:
Journal of Medical Systems Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The Meaningful Use criteria promises to make health information exchange (HIE) much more widespread. However, the usage of the information systems made available by existing HIE efforts tends to be very low. This study sought to examine the factors associated with usage of an operational HIE system during ambulatory care visits to safety-net clinics. Overall the HIE system was accessed for 21% of encounters. However, system access took on two distinct forms. In general, usage was more likely for patients with recent emergency department visits and chronic conditions. This study indicates the organizational commitment to engage in HIE does not necessarily mean that the information systems will be always used. In addition, system usage will take on various forms for different reasons. These results reveal considerations for the development, operation and evaluation of HIE efforts.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. The National Alliance for Health Information Technology. Report to the Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology on Defining Key Health Information Technology Terms. Department of Health & Human Services; 2008 [updated April 28, 2008March 3 2010]; Available from: http://healthit.hhs.gov/portal/server.pt?open=18&objID=848133&parentname=CommunityPage&parentid=5&mode=2&in_hi_userid=10741&cached=true.

  2. Kaelber, D. C., and Bates, D. W., Health information exchange and patient safety. J Biomed Inform 40(6, Supplement 1):S40–S5, 2007.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Kouroubali, A., Starren, J. B., and Clayton P. D., Costs and benefits of connecting community physicians to a hospital WAN. Proc AMIA Symp. 205–9, 1998.

  4. Institute of Medicine, In: Corrigan, J., Greiner, A., and Erikson, S. (Eds.), Fostering Rapid Advances in Health Care: Learning from System Demonstrations. National Academy Press, Washington, 2003.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Branger, P., van't Hooft, A., van der Wouden, H. C., Coordinating shared care using electronic data interchange. Medinfo. 8 Pt 2:1669, 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  6. McDonald C. J., Overhage J. M., Barnes M., Schadow G., Blevins L., Dexter P. R., et al., The Indiana Network For Patient Care: A Working Local Health Information Infrastructure Health Aff. 24(5):1214–20, 2005.

  7. eHealth Initiative. The State of Health Information Exchange in 2010: Connecting the Nation to Achieve Meaningful Use. Washington, DC2010.

  8. Vest, J. R., More than just a question of technology: Factors related to hospitals' adoption and implementation of health information exchange. Int J Med Inform 79(12):797–806, 2010.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Department of Health & Human Services. 42 CFR Parts 412, 413, 422 et al., Medicare and Medicaid Programs; Electronic Health Record Incentive Program; Final Rule. Federal Register. 75(144):44314–588, 2010.

  10. Overhage, J., Deter, P., Perkins, S., Cordell, W., McGoff, J., and McGrath, R., A randomized, controlled trial of clinical information shared from another institution. Ann Emerg Med 39(1):14–23, 2002.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Johnson K. B., Gadd C., Aronsky D., Yang K., Tang L., Estrin V., et al., The MidSouth eHealth Alliance: Use and Impact In the First Year. AMIA Annu Symp Proc. 333–7, 2008.

  12. Vest, J. R., Zhao, H., Jasperson, J., Gamm, L. D., and Ohsfeldt, R. L., Factors motivating and affecting health information exchange usage. J Am Med Inform Assoc 18(2):143–9, 2011.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Classen, D. C., Kanhouwa, M., Will, D., Casper, J., Lewin, J., and Walker, J., The patient safety institute demonstration project: a model for implementing a local health information infrastructure. J Healthc Inf Manag 19(4):75–86, 2005.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Wilcox A., Kuperman G., Dorr D. A., Hripcsak G., Narus S. P., Thornton S. N, et al., Architectural strategies and issues with health information exchange. AMIA Annu Symp Proc. 814–8, 2006.

  15. Hripcsak, G., Kaushal, R., Johnson, K. B., Ash, J. S., Bates, D. W., Block, R., et al., The United Hospital Fund meeting on evaluating health information exchange. J Biomed Inform 40(6 S1):S3–S10, 2007.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. The Direct Project. The Direct Project Overview. 2010 [cited 2010 Dec 8 2010]; Available from: http://wiki.directproject.org/file/view/DirectProjectOverview.pdf.

  17. Devaraj, S., and Kohli, R., Performance impacts of information technology: is actual usage the missing link. Manage Sci 49(3):273–89, 2003.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Vakkari, P., Task complexity, problem structure and information actions: Integrating studies on information seeking and retrieval. Inf Process Manage 35(6):819–37, 1999.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Pevnick, J. M., Claver, M., Dobalian, A., Asch, S. M., Stutman, H. R., Tomines, A., et al., Provider Stakeholders’ Perceived Benefit from a Nascent Health Information Exchange: A Qualitative Analysis. J Med Syst. 2010.

  20. Vest, J. R., Health information exchange and healthcare utilization. J Med Syst 33(3):223–31, 2009.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Wright, A., Soran, C., Jenter, C. A., Volk, L. A., Bates, D. W., and Simon, S. R., Physician attitudes toward health information exchange: results of a statewide survey. J Am Med Inform Assoc 17(1):66–70, 2010.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Vest, J. R., and Jasperson, 'J., Routine and novel search patterns in health information exchange. AMIA 2010 Annual Symposium; Washington, DC2010.

  23. Santerre, R. E., and Neun, S. P., Health Economics: Theories, Insights, and Industry Studies, 4th edition. Thomson South-Western, Manson, OH, 2007.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Shortell, S. M., Continuity of medical care: conceputalization and measurement. Med Care 14(5):377–91, 1976.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Charlson, M. E., Charlson, R. E., and Peterson, J. C., Marinopoulos S.S., Briggs W.M., Hollenberg J.P., The Charlson comorbidity index is adapted to predict costs of chronic disease in primary care patients. J Clin Epidemiol. [doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2008.01.006]. 61(12):1234–40, 2008.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Elixhauser, A., Steiner, C., Harris, D. R., and Coffey, R. M., Comorbidity Measures for Use with Administrative Data. Med Care 36(1):8–27, 1998.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Agency for Healthcare Research & Quality. Chronic Condition Indicator. Rockville, MD2009 [cited 2010 July 7 2010]; Available from: http://www.hcup-us.ahrq.gov/toolssoftware/chronic/chronic.jsp.

  28. Schoen, C., Osborn, R., Huynh, P. T., Doty, M., Davis, K., Zapert, K., et al., Primary Care And Health System Performance: Adults' Experiences In Five Countries. Health Aff. October 28, 2004;23(hlthaff.w4.487):w487-503, 2004.

  29. Heeks, R., Health information systems: Failure, success and improvisation. Int J Med Inform 75(2):125–37, 2006 Feb.

    Google Scholar 

  30. Halbesleben, J. R. B., Wakefield, D. S., and Wakefield, B. J., Work-arounds in health care settings: Literature review and research agenda. Health Care Manage Rev 33(1):2–12, 2008.

    Google Scholar 

  31. Halamka, J., and Fournier, G. A., MA-SHARE MedsInfo-ED medication history pilot. Am J Med Qual 21(5):296–8, 2006.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by Award Number R21CA138605 from the National Cancer Institute. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Cancer Institute or the National Institutes of Health. Also, we would like to thank Dan Brown and Anjum Khurshid at the Integrated Care Collaborative of Central Texas for their assistance with in obtaining the data for this study.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Jiann-Ping Hsu College of Public Health, Georgia Southern University, Statesboro, GA, USA

    Joshua R. Vest

  2. Department of Health Policy & Management, Texas A&M Health Science Center, School of Rural Public Health, College Station, TX, USA

    Larry D. Gamm & Robert L. Ohsfeldt

  3. Department of Epidemiology & Biostatistics, Texas A&M Health Science Center, School of Rural Public Health, College Station, TX, USA

    Hongwei Zhao

  4. Mays Business School, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX, USA

    ’Jon (Sean) Jasperson

Authors
  1. Joshua R. Vest
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Larry D. Gamm
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Robert L. Ohsfeldt
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Hongwei Zhao
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. ’Jon (Sean) Jasperson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Joshua R. Vest.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Vest, J.R., Gamm, L.D., Ohsfeldt, R.L. et al. Factors Associated with Health Information Exchange System Usage in a Safety-Net Ambulatory Care Clinic Setting. J Med Syst 36, 2455–2461 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10916-011-9712-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10916-011-9712-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation