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

审查卫生信息交换系统的实施成果：范围审查。

背景：卫生信息交换（HIE）促进了跨不同卫生系统和设置的数字卫生数据的安全交换。在医疗保健领域实施信息技术项目是复杂的，而通过衡量实施结果，对实施成功的定义和评估并不一致，这一事实使情况更加复杂。目前还没有已知的通过HIE技术领域的实施结果来检查实施成功的范围审查。本次范围审查的目的是提供与HIE解决方案（以及相关互操作性技术）的报告实施结果相关的研究综合，目的是为未来大规模HIE项目的实施提供信息。方法：在Arksey和O'Malley框架的指导下，对四个数据库（Medline、Embase、CINAHL和Web of Science）进行了范围综述，收集了2010年1月至2023年6月的研究。这些研究描述了跨不同组织和/或跨不同医疗保健设置实现支持互操作性或HIE的技术，并描述了对来自实施结果框架（IOF）的一个或多个实施结果的评估。结果：本综述纳入了37项研究。最常报告的是实施结果的采用情况（n = 24）。保真度和渗透率没有报道。很少有研究为评估的结果提供定义。很少有研究提供关于执行阶段的细节，因为它与审查的结果有关。没有研究使用IOF或其他类似的实施科学评估框架。结论：本综述强调了在HIE/互操作性解决方案实施研究领域存在的差距。未来的研究应采用理论框架来指导研究，规范描述实施结果的语言，扩大对实施不同阶段显著结果的认识。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

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.