Successful integration of an automated patient-reported outcome measure within a hospital electronic patient record.

Objectives: The objective of this evaluation was to assess the feasibility of implementing a fully integrated, automated, electronic patient-reported outcome measures (ePROM) system into a hospital electronic patient record (EPR; hospital-based clinical record). Additional objectives included evaluating the effect of the system on patient-reported outcome measures (PROM) completion rates and investigating the acceptability of the ePROM. Methods: The evaluation was conducted in a rheumatology clinic in a specialist children's hospital in the UK. Paper-based childhood HAQ PROMs were already used in the clinic, and an EPR was the main hospital information system. The technical feasibility of introducing the ePROM technology was assessed using a case study approach; the effect of the system on PROM completion rates was investigated using a before-after design; and acceptability was assessed using semi-structured questionnaires and a focus group. Results: An automated and integrated ePROM system was implemented successfully in April 2021. After implementation, ∼500 automated SMS text messaging invitations to complete ePROMs were sent to care-givers each month. PROM completion rates increased from 33 of 100 (33%) to 47 of 65 (72%) after the introduction of the ePROM system (χ2 = 11.51; P < 0.05). The ePROM system was highly acceptable to patients and clinical staff. Some clinical staff expressed a concern that an electronic system might represent a barrier to care for families with more limited resources. Conclusion: High levels of automation and integration with existing technology systems seemed to be key contextual factors associated with the successful implementation and adoption of the ePROM intervention in a paediatric rheumatology clinic.

Evaluating health information technologies: A systematic review of framework recommendations.

OBJECTIVE: Evaluating Health Information Technologies (HITs) can be challenging, but studies are necessary so that the most beneficial interventions can be identified. Our objective was to systematically review the available recommendations for improving the methods used in HIT evaluations. METHODS: HIT evaluation frameworks were identified from database (MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL) and grey literature searches. Outcome measures included framework recommendations and characteristics. Recommendations were coded and organised using thematic analysis methods. A scoring instrument was used to measure framework quality. RESULTS: The search identified 23 frameworks and 272 recommendations. These were organised into five evaluation domains and 42 themes. The themes included recommendations for improving the evaluation of technical aspects of HITs (e.g. describing aspects of HIT functionality) and suggestions for improving the evaluation of complex factors that may influence the overall effects of HITs (e.g. careful reporting of whether the HIT became integrated into existing working patterns). The frameworks were not generally developed in association with healthcare professionals, or with input from patients. The frameworks tended not to have been developed using systematic methods designed to reduce the risk of bias. DISCUSSION: HIT evaluations are important but they are challenging to conduct and appraise. This review was conducted using systematic methods enabling the organisation of framework recommendations into key themes. These findings may help investigators to successfully plan, conduct and appraise HIT evaluations. The quality appraisal demonstrated that HIT evaluation research may be improved by using more systematic methods and the involvement of participants from a range of differing backgrounds.

Patient-focused outcomes are infrequently reported in pediatric health information technology trials: a systematic review.

OBJECTIVES: Billions of dollars have been invested in Health Information Technologies (HITs), and randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have been conducted to identify the effects of these interventions. Our objective was to identify the types of outcomes that were measured and reported in these RCTs. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: We completed a systematic review (Medline, EMBASE, and CENTRAL databases) of RCTs involving children (<18 years) and utilizing HIT interventions. RESULTS: We identified 45 RCTs involving 323,945 children. Most studies reported process outcomes (n = 40/45 (88.9%)) but did not include patient-focused outcomes such as patient/carer functioning (n = 12/45 (26.7%)), clinical/physiological health (n = 10/45, 22.2%), quality of life (n = 3/45, 6.7%), or mortality (n = 1/45, 2.2%). Only 3 of 45 (6.7%) studies reported an evaluation of adverse events. In only 14 of 45 (31.1%) studies was it clear that all outcomes that were measured were reported. CONCLUSION: It is difficult to use RCTs to fully evaluate the benefits and risks of using HIT interventions in pediatric health care settings because patient-focused outcomes and adverse events are rarely reported. Measures to improve the quality of future trials may include the publication of study protocols and the development of an outcome reporting framework or core outcome set.

A systematic review of the effects of implementing clinical pathways supported by health information technologies.

OBJECTIVE: Health information technology (HIT) interventions include electronic patient records, prescribing, and ordering systems. Clinical pathways are multidisciplinary plans of care that enable the delivery of evidence-based healthcare. Our objective was to systematically review the effects of implementing HIT-supported clinical pathways. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A systematic review protocol was developed including Medline, Embase, and CENTRAL database searches. We recorded data relating to study design, participants, intervention, and outcome characteristics and formally assessed risk of bias. RESULTS: Forty-four studies involving more than 270 000 patients were included. Investigation methodologies included before-after (n = 16, 36.4%), noncomparative (n = 14, 31.8%), interrupted time series (n = 5, 11.4%), retrospective cohort (n = 4, 9.1%), cluster randomized (n = 2, 4.5%), controlled before-after (n = 1, 2.3%), prospective case-control (n = 1, 2.3%), and prospective cohort (n = 1, 2.3%) study designs. Clinical decision support (n = 25, 56.8%), modified electronic documentation (n = 23, 52.3%), and computerized provider order entry (n = 23, 52.3%) were the most frequently utilized HIT interventions. The majority of studies (n = 38, 86.4%) reported benefits associated with HIT-supported pathways. These included reported improvements in objectively measured patient outcomes (n = 15, 34.1%), quality of care (n = 29, 65.9%), and healthcare resource utilization (n = 10, n = 22.7%). DISCUSSION: Although most studies reported improvements in outcomes, the strength of evidence was limited by the study designs that were utilized. CONCLUSIONS: Ongoing evaluations of HIT-supported clinical pathways are justified but would benefit from study designs that report key outcomes (including adverse events) and minimize the risk of bias.