Examining implementation outcomes in health information exchange systems: A scoping review

IF 4 2区医学 Q2 COMPUTER SCIENCE, INTERDISCIPLINARY APPLICATIONS

Journal of Biomedical Informatics Pub Date : 2025-01-20 DOI:10.1016/j.jbi.2025.104782

Bonnie Lum , Navisha Weerasinghe , Charlene H. Chu , Dan Perri , Lisa Cranley

{"title":"Examining implementation outcomes in health information exchange systems: A scoping review","authors":"Bonnie Lum , Navisha Weerasinghe , Charlene H. Chu , Dan Perri , Lisa Cranley","doi":"10.1016/j.jbi.2025.104782","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>Health information exchange (HIE) facilitates the secure exchange of digital health data across disparate health systems and settings. The implementation of information technology projects in healthcare is complex, further complicated by the fact that implementation success, through the measure of implementation outcomes, has been inconsistently defined and evaluated. There is no known scoping review examining implementation success through implementation outcomes in the field of HIE technologies. The aim of this scoping review was to provide a synthesis of studies related to reported implementation outcomes of HIE solutions (and related interoperability technologies) with a goal to inform the implementation of large-scale HIE projects in the future.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>A scoping review, guided by the Arksey and O’Malley Framework, was conducted in four databases (Medline, Embase, CINAHL, and Web of Science), gathering studies from January 2010 to June 2023. Studies that described the implementation of a technology supporting interoperability or HIE across different organizations and/or across different healthcare settings and described the evaluation of one or more implementation outcomes from the Implementation Outcome Framework (IOF) were included.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>37 studies were included in this review. The implementation outcome adoption was most frequently reported (n = 24). Fidelity and penetration were not reported. Few studies provided definitions for the outcomes being evaluated. Few studies provided details surrounding the stage of implementation as it relates to the outcome examined. No studies used the IOF or other similar implementation science evaluation frameworks.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>This review highlights the existing gaps in the field of HIE/interoperability solutions implementation studies. Future studies should employ theoretical frameworks to guide their research, standardize language used to describe implementation outcomes, and expand knowledge of salient outcomes at varying stages of implementation.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":15263,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Biomedical Informatics","volume":"163 ","pages":"Article 104782"},"PeriodicalIF":4.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Biomedical Informatics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1532046425000115","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"COMPUTER SCIENCE, INTERDISCIPLINARY APPLICATIONS","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

Health information exchange (HIE) facilitates the secure exchange of digital health data across disparate health systems and settings. The implementation of information technology projects in healthcare is complex, further complicated by the fact that implementation success, through the measure of implementation outcomes, has been inconsistently defined and evaluated. There is no known scoping review examining implementation success through implementation outcomes in the field of HIE technologies. The aim of this scoping review was to provide a synthesis of studies related to reported implementation outcomes of HIE solutions (and related interoperability technologies) with a goal to inform the implementation of large-scale HIE projects in the future.

Methods

A scoping review, guided by the Arksey and O’Malley Framework, was conducted in four databases (Medline, Embase, CINAHL, and Web of Science), gathering studies from January 2010 to June 2023. Studies that described the implementation of a technology supporting interoperability or HIE across different organizations and/or across different healthcare settings and described the evaluation of one or more implementation outcomes from the Implementation Outcome Framework (IOF) were included.

Results

37 studies were included in this review. The implementation outcome adoption was most frequently reported (n = 24). Fidelity and penetration were not reported. Few studies provided definitions for the outcomes being evaluated. Few studies provided details surrounding the stage of implementation as it relates to the outcome examined. No studies used the IOF or other similar implementation science evaluation frameworks.

Conclusion

This review highlights the existing gaps in the field of HIE/interoperability solutions implementation studies. Future studies should employ theoretical frameworks to guide their research, standardize language used to describe implementation outcomes, and expand knowledge of salient outcomes at varying stages of implementation.

Abstract Image

查看原文本刊更多论文

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Journal of Biomedical Informatics 医学-计算机：跨学科应用

CiteScore

8.90

自引率

6.70%

发文量

243

审稿时长

32 days

期刊介绍： The Journal of Biomedical Informatics reflects a commitment to high-quality original research papers, reviews, and commentaries in the area of biomedical informatics methodology. Although we publish articles motivated by applications in the biomedical sciences (for example, clinical medicine, health care, population health, and translational bioinformatics), the journal emphasizes reports of new methodologies and techniques that have general applicability and that form the basis for the evolving science of biomedical informatics. Articles on medical devices; evaluations of implemented systems (including clinical trials of information technologies); or papers that provide insight into a biological process, a specific disease, or treatment options would generally be more suitable for publication in other venues. Papers on applications of signal processing and image analysis are often more suitable for biomedical engineering journals or other informatics journals, although we do publish papers that emphasize the information management and knowledge representation/modeling issues that arise in the storage and use of biological signals and images. System descriptions are welcome if they illustrate and substantiate the underlying methodology that is the principal focus of the report and an effort is made to address the generalizability and/or range of application of that methodology. Note also that, given the international nature of JBI, papers that deal with specific languages other than English, or with country-specific health systems or approaches, are acceptable for JBI only if they offer generalizable lessons that are relevant to the broad JBI readership, regardless of their country, language, culture, or health system.