scholarly journals Health Information Exchange Use (1990-2015): A Systematic Review

2017 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 27 ◽  
Author(s):  
Emily Beth Devine ◽  
Annette M. Totten ◽  
Paul Gorman ◽  
Karen B. Eden ◽  
Steven Kassakian ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Health Information ◽  
Information Exchange ◽  
Health Information Exchange

Understanding the patient privacy perspective on health information exchange: A systematic review

2019 ◽  
Vol 125 ◽  
pp. 1-12 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nelson Shen ◽  
Thérèse Bernier ◽  
Lydia Sequeira ◽  
John Strauss ◽  
Michelle Pannor Silver ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Health Information ◽  
Information Exchange ◽  
Health Information Exchange ◽  
Patient Privacy

scholarly journals Outcomes From Health Information Exchange: Systematic Review and Future Research Needs

2015 ◽  
Vol 3 (4) ◽  
pp. e39 ◽  
Author(s):  
William R Hersh ◽  
Annette M Totten ◽  
Karen B Eden ◽  
Beth Devine ◽  
Paul Gorman ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Health Information ◽  
Information Exchange ◽  
Health Information Exchange ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Research Needs

scholarly journals Malaysia Health Information Exchange: A systematic review

2017 ◽  
Vol 13 (5) ◽  
pp. 708-723
Author(s):  
Nurul Izzatty Ismail ◽  
Nor Hazana Abdullah
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Health Information ◽  
Information Exchange ◽  
Health Information Exchange

scholarly journals The benefits of health information exchange: an updated systematic review

2018 ◽  
Vol 25 (9) ◽  
pp. 1259-1265 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nir Menachemi ◽  
Saurabh Rahurkar ◽  
Christopher A Harle ◽  
Joshua R Vest
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
New York ◽  
Health Information ◽  
Information Exchange ◽  
Health Information Exchange ◽  
Care Delivery ◽  
The United States ◽  
Current Systematic Review ◽  
Meta Analyses ◽  
The Impact

Abstract Objective Widespread health information exchange (HIE) is a national objective motivated by the promise of improved care and a reduction in costs. Previous reviews have found little rigorous evidence that HIE positively affects these anticipated benefits. However, early studies of HIE were methodologically limited. The purpose of the current study is to review the recent literature on the impact of HIE. Methods We used the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines to conduct our systematic review. PubMed and Scopus databases were used to identify empirical articles that evaluated HIE in the context of a health care outcome. Results Our search strategy identified 24 articles that included 63 individual analyses. The majority of the studies were from the United States representing 9 states; and about 40% of the included analyses occurred in a handful of HIEs from the state of New York. Seven of the 24 studies used designs suitable for causal inference and all reported some beneficial effect from HIE; none reported adverse effects. Conclusions The current systematic review found that studies with more rigorous designs all reported benefits from HIE. Such benefits include fewer duplicated procedures, reduced imaging, lower costs, and improved patient safety. We also found that studies evaluating community HIEs were more likely to find benefits than studies that evaluated enterprise HIEs or vendor-mediated exchanges. Overall, these finding bode well for the HIEs ability to deliver on anticipated improvements in care delivery and reduction in costs.

scholarly journals Maturity assessment of Kenya’s health information system interoperability readiness

2021 ◽  
Vol 28 (1) ◽  
pp. e100241
Author(s):  
Job Nyangena ◽  
Rohini Rajgopal ◽  
Elizabeth Adhiambo Ombech ◽  
Enock Oloo ◽  
Humphrey Luchetu ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Health Information ◽  
Information Exchange ◽  
Working Group ◽  
Data Exchange ◽  
Enterprise Architecture ◽  
Health Information Exchange ◽  
Digital Health ◽  
Health Information System ◽  
Maturity Level ◽  
Technical Standards

BackgroundThe use of digital technology in healthcare promises to improve quality of care and reduce costs over time. This promise will be difficult to attain without interoperability: facilitating seamless health information exchange between the deployed digital health information systems (HIS).ObjectiveTo determine the maturity readiness of the interoperability capacity of Kenya’s HIS.MethodsWe used the HIS Interoperability Maturity Toolkit, developed by MEASURE Evaluation and the Health Data Collaborative’s Digital Health and Interoperability Working Group. The assessment was undertaken by eHealth stakeholder representatives primarily from the Ministry of Health’s Digital Health Technical Working Group. The toolkit focused on three major domains: leadership and governance, human resources and technology.ResultsMost domains are at the lowest two levels of maturity: nascent or emerging. At the nascent level, HIS activities happen by chance or represent isolated, ad hoc efforts. An emerging maturity level characterises a system with defined HIS processes and structures. However, such processes are not systematically documented and lack ongoing monitoring mechanisms.ConclusionNone of the domains had a maturity level greater than level 2 (emerging). The subdomains of governance structures for HIS, defined national enterprise architecture for HIS, defined technical standards for data exchange, nationwide communication network infrastructure, and capacity for operations and maintenance of hardware attained higher maturity levels. These findings are similar to those from interoperability maturity assessments done in Ghana and Uganda.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document