Search

After more than a decade of investment in electronic health information exchange (HIE), the Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology is advancing a national framework-the Trusted Exchange Framework and Common Agreement-to connect islands of electronic data sharing. This national framework creates new potential opportunities and challenges for state and local health information organizations (HIOs). We undertook our sixth national HIO survey to assess the current state of HIOs and to newly examine anticipated responses to the Trusted Exchange Framework and Common Agreement. We identified eighty-nine operational HIOs, down from 106 in 2014. Although more than half of HIOs struggled with financial viability and competition from health information technology vendor-based HIE networks, many are large in scale, offer a breadth of services to diverse participants, and engage in network-to-network connectivity. Looking ahead, 56 percent of HIOs planned to participate in the Trusted Exchange Framework and Common Agreement, and 41 percent were unsure. As the Trusted Exchange Framework and Common Agreement advances basic network-to-network connectivity, HIOs that have experience with such connectivity while also offering value-added services will be well positioned for sustainability and growth.

Achieving an interoperable health care system remains a top US policy priority. Despite substantial efforts to encourage interoperability, the first set of national data in 2014 suggested that hospitals' engagement levels were low. With 2015 data now available, we examined the first national trends in engagement in four domains of interoperability: finding, sending, receiving, and integrating electronic patient information from outside providers. We found small gains, with 29.7 percent of hospitals engaging in all four domains in 2015 compared to 24.5 percent in 2014. The two domains with the most progress were sending (with an increase of 8.1 percentage points) and receiving (an increase of 8.4 percentage points) information, while there was no change in integrating systems. Hospitals' use for patient care of data from outside providers was low, with only 18.7 percent of hospitals reporting that they "often" used these data. Our results reveal that hospitals' progress toward interoperability is slow and that progress is focused on moving information between hospitals, not on ensuring usability of information in clinical decisions.

Countries around the globe are investing in health information and communications technologies (ICTs) as critical tools for improving care for chronically ill patients. We profiled four high-income nations with varied health ICT strategies--Australia, Canada, Denmark, and the United States--to describe their use of ICTs to improve chronic care. Our goal was to identify common challenges and opportunities for cross-national learning. We found four key themes. First, although all four countries have a national strategy for health ICT adoption, strategies are implemented and adapted to chronic care needs regionally, which creates the challenge of spreading successful efforts across regions. Second, each country struggles with how to ensure that clinical information follows patients seamlessly between care settings. Third, although each nation is pursuing telehealth solutions as a component of chronic care, the telehealth initiatives are usually stand-alone efforts that are not well integrated into other ICT solutions, such as electronic health records. Finally, countries have made progress in improving patients' access to their clinical data but have not fully succeeded in engaging patients to apply the data to improve care. These common themes suggest that although the four nations have different health care systems and ICT strategies, all of them face a similar set of challenges, creating an opportunity for cross-national learning.

The United States is making substantial investments to accelerate the adoption and use of interoperable electronic health record (EHR) systems. Using data from the 2009-13 Electronic Health Records Survey, we found that EHR adoption continues to grow: In 2013, 78 percent of office-based physicians had adopted some type of EHR, and 48 percent had the capabilities required for a basic EHR system. However, we also found persistent gaps in EHR adoption, with physicians in solo practices and non-primary care specialties lagging behind others. Physicians' electronic health information exchange with other providers was limited, with only 14 percent sharing data with providers outside their organization. Finally, we found that 30 percent of physicians routinely used capabilities for secure messaging with patients, and 24 percent routinely provided patients with the ability to view online, download, or transmit their health record. These findings suggest that although EHR adoption continues to grow, policies to support health information exchange and patient engagement will require ongoing attention.

Telehealth is widely believed to hold great potential to improve access to, and increase the value of, health care. Gaining a better understanding of why some hospitals adopt telehealth technologies while others do not is critically important. We examined factors associated with telehealth adoption among US hospitals. Data from the Information Technology Supplement to the American Hospital Association's 2012 annual survey of acute care hospitals show that 42 percent of US hospitals have telehealth capabilities. Hospitals more likely to have telehealth capabilities are teaching hospitals, those equipped with additional advanced medical technology, those that are members of a larger system, and those that are nonprofit institutions. Rates of hospital telehealth adoption by state vary substantially and are associated with differences in state policy. Policies that promote private payer reimbursement for telehealth are associated with greater likelihood of telehealth adoption, while policies that require out-of-state providers to have a special license to provide telehealth services reduce the likelihood of adoption. Our findings suggest steps that policy makers can take to achieve greater adoption of telehealth by hospitals.

Policy makers are actively promoting the electronic exchange of health information to improve the quality and efficiency of health care. We conducted a national survey of organizations facilitating health information exchange, to assess national progress. We found that 30 percent of hospitals and 10 percent of ambulatory practices now participate in one of the 119 operational health information exchange efforts across the United States, substantial growth from prior surveys. However, we also found that 74 percent of health information exchange efforts report struggling to develop a sustainable business model. Our findings suggest that despite progress, there is a substantial risk that many current efforts to promote health information exchange will fail when public funds supporting these initiatives are depleted.

Electronic clinical data exchange promises substantial financial and societal benefits, but it is unclear whether and when it will become widespread. In early 2007 we surveyed 145 regional health information organizations (RHIOs), the U.S. entities working to establish data exchange. Nearly one in four was likely defunct. Only twenty efforts were of at least modest size and exchanging clinical data. Most early successes involved the exchange of test results. To support themselves, thirteen RHIOs received regular fees from participating organizations, and eight were heavily dependent on grants. Our findings raise concerns about the ability of the current approach to achieve widespread electronic clinical data exchange.

In this paper we assess the value of electronic health care information exchange and interoperability (HIEI) between providers (hospitals and medical group practices) and independent laboratories, radiology centers, pharmacies, payers, public health departments, and other providers. We have created an HIEI taxonomy and combined published evidence with expert opinion in a cost-benefit model. Fully standardized HIEI could yield a net value of dollar 77.8 billion per year once fully implemented. Nonstandardized HIEI offers smaller positive financial returns. The clinical impact of HIEI for which quantitative estimates cannot yet be made would likely add further value. A compelling business case exists for national implementation of fully standardized HIEI.