PubMed · 16248437
The source did not provide an abstract. Follow the original record for more information.
Explore connections, maps & timelines
William A Arbogast. Keep IT coming.. https://doi.org/10.2345/0899-8205(2005)39%5B333%3Akic%5D2.0.co%3B2
Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.
KEEP EXPLORING
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Information technology such as electronic medical records (EMRs), electronic prescribing and decision support systems are recognized as essential tools in Europe, the U.S., Canada, Australia, and New Zealand. But significant barriers impede wide-scale adoption of these tools, especially EMR systems. OBJECTIVES: The objectives of this study were to investigate the present status of information technology in health care, the perceived benefits and barriers by primary care physicians. METHODS: Literature analysis and survey data from primary care physicians on adoption of information technology are reviewed. RESULTS: The U.S. trails European countries as well as Canada, Australia and New Zealand in the use of information technology in primary care. The results of the study indicate that physicians in general perceive benefits to information technology, but also cite major barriers to its implementation in their practices. These barriers include lack of access to capital by health care providers, complex systems and lack of data standards that permit exchange of clinical data, privacy concerns and legal barriers. CONCLUSIONS: Overcoming these barriers will require subsidies and performance incentives by payers and government; certification and standardization of vendor applications that permit clinical data exchange; removal of legal barriers; and greater security of medical data to convince practitioners and patients of the value of EMRs.
OBJECTIVES: Virtual integration of distributed patient data promises advantages over a consolidated health record, but raises questions mainly about practicability and authorization concepts. Our work aims on specification and development of a virtual shared health record architecture using a patient-centred integration and authorization model. METHODS: A literature survey summarizes considerations of current architectural approaches. Complemented by a methodical analysis in two regional settings, a formal architecture model was specified and implemented. RESULTS: Results presented in this paper are a survey of architectural approaches for shared health records and an architecture model for a virtual shared EHR, which combines a patient-centred integration policy with provider-oriented document management. An electronic consent system assures, that access to the shared record remains under control of the patient. A corresponding system prototype has been developed and is currently being introduced and evaluated in a regional setting. CONCLUSION: The proposed architecture is capable of partly replacing message-based communications. Operating highly available provider repositories for the virtual shared EHR requires advanced technology and probably means additional costs for care providers. Acceptance of the proposed architecture depends on transparently embedding document validation and digital signature into the work processes. The paradigm shift from paper-based messaging to a "pull model" needs further evaluation.
Can higher quality healthcare practices emerge from the development and use of a loosely integrated set of intranets? This paper examines that question through a series of empirical examples that draw on data from one healthcare organization that was part of a multi-year, multi-industry study of intranets. Some of this organization's intranets link clinical practice guidelines to healthcare delivery, in ways that mimic manufacturing sector efforts to improve product quality and reliability. Others act as staging grounds and information repositories for coordinating responses to new rulings and changing interpretations of how to implement recently enacted healthcare legislation. This activity is reminiscent of coordinated responses, among firms and their legal counsel, to new legislation in other industries, like telecommunications; and to wide-reaching regulatory efforts, like environmental protection. Although the technologies have changed and the legislative objectives vary greatly, organizational approaches to such improvements are less varied. Ironically, these overarching similarities focus attention on the need for continued articulation of changes and local differences in information system use, and the ability of boundary-spanners to introduce ways of working that bridge these gaps and refine healthcare practices that drift toward higher quality.