Only 50 percent of health information exchanges use or plan to use metrics to measure their impact, according to a study published in American Health Information Management Association's Perspectives in Health Information Management.
Ninety-six HIEs completed a 21-question survey, but valid responses were only received from 18. Under eHealth Initiative criteria, all participating HIEs qualified as Stage 5 or higher, meaning they were a "fully operational health information organization; transmitting data that is being used by healthcare stakeholders," according to the study. Results from the survey showed that most of the HIE respondents operate as non-profit organizations, serve large patient populations and have annual budgets of more than $1 million.
Findings from the study show that most respondents agree that HIEs add value in quality improvement and offer returns on investment. However, there is a general lack of preparedness to measure and document improvements in quality and to show the value of the exchange of health information.
• Ten respondents (56 percent) said that based on the performance of their own HIE, they believed that HIEs show positive ROI, while eight respondents (44 percent) felt more evidence was needed to make such a determination.
• Two respondents who believed HIEs show positive ROI stated that they have not used metrics to calculate ROI but are in the process of developing ROI metrics.
• Seventeen respondents (94 percent) believed that HIEs improve quality of care.
• Respondents cited duplicative testing, quality improvement efforts, care coordination and improved readmission rates as having the greatest potential to show ROI for HIEs.
• More than half of the organizations have used or plan to use a reduction in duplicative tests or procedures, improved communication among providers and improved health outcomes to measure the impact on ROI.
• Forty percent of the organizations that were using some ROI metrics also believed more evidence was needed to show a positive impact of HIEs.
• Only 50 percent of the HIEs reported using metrics for quality improvement. Of these, most organizations tracked quality improvement in a number of different areas related to clinical outcomes and some preventive measures, including readmissions, vaccination rates, diabetes management and cancer screening.
According to the study, the most likely reason for the lack of uniform metrics is the absence of incentives to develop and use them. Although federal funds have provided more incentive for the HIE movement to promote meaningful exchange of health information, it is now up to the HIEs to incorporate metrics and share successes, according to the study.
Wheeling Hospital, West Virginia University Healthcare Pilot Health Information Network
Building a Robust, Sustainable Health Information Exchange: Case Study with Northeast Georgia Health System, HealtheConnect
Ninety-six HIEs completed a 21-question survey, but valid responses were only received from 18. Under eHealth Initiative criteria, all participating HIEs qualified as Stage 5 or higher, meaning they were a "fully operational health information organization; transmitting data that is being used by healthcare stakeholders," according to the study. Results from the survey showed that most of the HIE respondents operate as non-profit organizations, serve large patient populations and have annual budgets of more than $1 million.
Findings from the study show that most respondents agree that HIEs add value in quality improvement and offer returns on investment. However, there is a general lack of preparedness to measure and document improvements in quality and to show the value of the exchange of health information.
• Ten respondents (56 percent) said that based on the performance of their own HIE, they believed that HIEs show positive ROI, while eight respondents (44 percent) felt more evidence was needed to make such a determination.
• Two respondents who believed HIEs show positive ROI stated that they have not used metrics to calculate ROI but are in the process of developing ROI metrics.
• Seventeen respondents (94 percent) believed that HIEs improve quality of care.
• Respondents cited duplicative testing, quality improvement efforts, care coordination and improved readmission rates as having the greatest potential to show ROI for HIEs.
• More than half of the organizations have used or plan to use a reduction in duplicative tests or procedures, improved communication among providers and improved health outcomes to measure the impact on ROI.
• Forty percent of the organizations that were using some ROI metrics also believed more evidence was needed to show a positive impact of HIEs.
• Only 50 percent of the HIEs reported using metrics for quality improvement. Of these, most organizations tracked quality improvement in a number of different areas related to clinical outcomes and some preventive measures, including readmissions, vaccination rates, diabetes management and cancer screening.
According to the study, the most likely reason for the lack of uniform metrics is the absence of incentives to develop and use them. Although federal funds have provided more incentive for the HIE movement to promote meaningful exchange of health information, it is now up to the HIEs to incorporate metrics and share successes, according to the study.
More Articles on Health Information Exchanges:
Veterans Affairs, Dept. of Defense to Expand Health Information ExchangesWheeling Hospital, West Virginia University Healthcare Pilot Health Information Network
Building a Robust, Sustainable Health Information Exchange: Case Study with Northeast Georgia Health System, HealtheConnect