Rolling Up the Sleeve: Equitable, Efficient, and Safe COVID-19 Mass Immunization for Academic Medical Center Employees.

BACKGROUND: Novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine administration has faced distribution barriers across the United States. We sought to delineate our vaccine delivery experience in the first week of vaccine availability, and our effort to prioritize employees based on risk with a goal of providing an efficient infrastructure to optimize speed and efficiency of vaccine delivery while minimizing risk of infection during the immunization process. OBJECTIVE: This article aims to evaluate an employee prioritization/invitation/scheduling system, leveraging an integrated electronic health record patient portal framework for employee COVID-19 immunizations at an academic medical center. METHODS: We conducted an observational cross-sectional study during January 2021 at a single urban academic center. All employees who met COVID-19 allocation vaccine criteria for phase 1a.1 to 1a.4 were included. We implemented a prioritization/invitation/scheduling framework and evaluated time from invitation to scheduling as a proxy for vaccine interest and arrival to vaccine administration to measure operational throughput. RESULTS: We allotted vaccines for 13,753 employees but only 10,662 employees with an active patient portal account received an invitation. Of those with an active account, 6,483 (61%) scheduled an appointment and 6,251 (59%) were immunized in the first 7 days. About 66% of invited providers were vaccinated in the first 7 days. In contrast, only 41% of invited facility/food service employees received the first dose of the vaccine in the first 7 days (p < 0.001). At the vaccination site, employees waited 5.6 minutes (interquartile range [IQR]: 3.9-8.3) from arrival to vaccination. CONCLUSION: We developed a system of early COVID-19 vaccine prioritization and administration in our health care system. We saw strong early acceptance in those with proximal exposure to COVID-19 but noticed significant difference in the willingness of different employee groups to receive the vaccine.

Rapid Development of Specialty Population Registries and Quality Measures from Electronic Health Record Data*. An Agile Framework.

BACKGROUND: Creation of a new electronic health record (EHR)-based registry often can be a "one-off" complex endeavor: first developing new EHR data collection and clinical decision support tools, followed by developing registry-specific data extractions from the EHR for analysis. Each development phase typically has its own long development and testing time, leading to a prolonged overall cycle time for delivering one functioning registry with companion reporting into production. The next registry request then starts from scratch. Such an approach will not scale to meet the emerging demand for specialty registries to support population health and value-based care. OBJECTIVE: To determine if the creation of EHR-based specialty registries could be markedly accelerated by employing (a) a finite core set of EHR data collection principles and methods, (b) concurrent engineering of data extraction and data warehouse design using a common dimensional data model for all registries, and (c) agile development methods commonly employed in new product development. METHODS: We adopted as guiding principles to (a) capture data as a byproduct of care of the patient, (b) reinforce optimal EHR use by clinicians, (c) employ a finite but robust set of EHR data capture tool types, and (d) leverage our existing technology toolkit. Registries were defined by a shared condition (recorded on the Problem List) or a shared exposure to a procedure (recorded on the Surgical History) or to a medication (recorded on the Medication List). Any EHR fields needed - either to determine registry membership or to calculate a registry-associated clinical quality measure (CQM) - were included in the enterprise data warehouse (EDW) shared dimensional data model. Extract-transform-load (ETL) code was written to pull data at defined "grains" from the EHR into the EDW model. All calculated CQM values were stored in a single Fact table in the EDW crossing all registries. Registry-specific dashboards were created in the EHR to display both (a) real-time patient lists of registry patients and (b) EDW-generated CQM data. Agile project management methods were employed, including co-development, lightweight requirements documentation with User Stories and acceptance criteria, and time-boxed iterative development of EHR features in 2-week "sprints" for rapid-cycle feedback and refinement. RESULTS: Using this approach, in calendar year 2015 we developed a total of 43 specialty chronic disease registries, with 111 new EHR data collection and clinical decision support tools, 163 new clinical quality measures, and 30 clinic-specific dashboards reporting on both real-time patient care gaps and summarized and vetted CQM measure performance trends. CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests concurrent design of EHR data collection tools and reporting can quickly yield useful EHR structured data for chronic disease registries, and bodes well for efforts to migrate away from manual abstraction. This work also supports the view that in new EHR-based registry development, as in new product development, adopting agile principles and practices can help deliver valued, high-quality features early and often.