scholarly journals Innovation in a Learning Health Care System: Veteran-Directed Home- and Community-Based Services

2017 ◽  
Vol 65 (11) ◽  
pp. 2446-2451 ◽  
Author(s):  
Melissa M. Garrido ◽  
Richard M. Allman ◽  
Steven D. Pizer ◽  
James L. Rudolph ◽  
Kali S. Thomas ◽  
...  
2018 ◽  
Vol 30 (3) ◽  
pp. 161-168 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stuart McLennan ◽  
Hannes Kahrass ◽  
Susanne Wieschowski ◽  
Daniel Strech ◽  
Holger Langhof

2013 ◽  
Vol 43 (s1) ◽  
pp. S16-S27 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ruth R. Faden ◽  
Nancy E. Kass ◽  
Steven N. Goodman ◽  
Peter Pronovost ◽  
Sean Tunis ◽  
...  

2020 ◽  
pp. OP.20.00454
Author(s):  
Rochelle D. Jones ◽  
Chris Krenz ◽  
Kent A. Griffith ◽  
Rebecca Spence ◽  
Angela R. Bradbury ◽  
...  

PURPOSE: The learning health care system (LHS) was designed to enable real-time learning and research by harnessing data generated during patients’ clinical encounters. This novel approach begets ethical questions regarding the oversight of users and uses of patient data. Understanding patients’ perspectives is vitally important. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted democratic deliberation sessions focused on CancerLinQ, a real-world LHS. Experts presented educational content, and then small group discussions were held to elicit viewpoints. The deliberations centered around whether policies should permit or deny certain users and uses of secondary data. De-identified transcripts of the discussions were examined by using thematic analysis. RESULTS: Analysis identified two thematic clusters: expectations and concerns, which seemed to inform LHS governance recommendations. Participants expected to benefit from the LHS through the advancement of medical knowledge, which they hoped would improve treatments and the quality of their care. They were concerned that profit-driven users might manipulate the data in ways that could burden or exploit patients, hinder medical decisions, or compromise patient-provider communication. It was recommended that restricted access, user fees, and penalties should be imposed to prevent users, especially for-profit entities, from misusing data. Another suggestion was that patients should be notified of potential ethical issues and included on diverse, unbiased governing boards. CONCLUSION: If patients are to trust and support LHS endeavors, their concerns about for-profit users must be addressed. The ethical implementation of such systems should consist of patient representation on governing boards, transparency, and strict oversight of for-profit users.


2019 ◽  
Vol 10 (01) ◽  
pp. 001-009 ◽  
Author(s):  
Barbara Jones ◽  
Dave Collingridge ◽  
Caroline Vines ◽  
Herman Post ◽  
John Holmen ◽  
...  

Background Local implementation of guidelines for pneumonia care is strongly recommended, but the context of care that affects implementation is poorly understood. In a learning health care system, computerized clinical decision support (CDS) provides an opportunity to both improve and track practice, providing insights into the implementation process. Objectives This article examines physician interactions with a CDS to identify reasons for rejection of guideline recommendations. Methods We implemented a multicenter bedside CDS for the emergency department management of pneumonia that integrated patient data with guideline-based recommendations. We examined the frequency of adoption versus rejection of recommendations for site-of-care and antibiotic selection. We analyzed free-text responses provided by physicians explaining their clinical reasoning for rejection, using concept mapping and thematic analysis. Results Among 1,722 patient episodes, physicians rejected recommendations to send a patient home in 24%, leaving text in 53%; reasons for rejection of the recommendations included additional or alternative diagnoses beyond pneumonia, and comorbidities or signs of physiologic derangement contributing to risk of outpatient failure that were not processed by the CDS. Physicians rejected broad-spectrum antibiotic recommendations in 10%, leaving text in 76%; differences in pathogen risk assessment, additional patient information, concern about antibiotic properties, and admitting physician preferences were given as reasons for rejection. Conclusion While adoption of CDS recommendations for pneumonia was high, physicians rejecting recommendations frequently provided feedback, reporting alternative diagnoses, additional individual patient characteristics, and provider preferences as major reasons for rejection. CDS that collects user feedback is feasible and can contribute to a learning health system.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document