Refine
Document Type
- Article (2)
Language
- English (2)
Has Fulltext
- no (2)
Is part of the Bibliography
- yes (2)
Keywords
- health information technology (2) (remove)
Institute
- Fakultät WiSo (2)
Background and purpose:
Clinical information logistics is a construct that aims to describe and explain various phenomena of information provision to drive clinical processes. It can be measured by the workflow composite score, an aggregated indicator of the degree of IT support in clinical processes. This study primarily aimed to investigate the yet unknown empirical patterns constituting this construct. The second goal was to derive a data-driven weighting scheme for the constituents of the workflow composite score and to contrast this scheme with a literature based, top-down procedure. This approach should finally test the validity and robustness of the workflow composite score.
Methods:
Based on secondary data from 183 German hospitals, a tiered factor analytic approach (confirmatory and subsequent exploratory factor analysis) was pursued. A weighting scheme, which was based on factor loadings obtained in the analyses, was put into practice.
Results:
We were able to identify five statistically significant factors of clinical information logistics that accounted for 63% of the overall variance. These factors were “flow of data and information”, “mobility”, “clinical decision support and patient safety”, “electronic patient record” and “integration and distribution”. The system of weights derived from the factor loadings resulted in values for the workflow composite score that differed only slightly from the score values that had been previously published based on a top-down approach.
Conclusion:
Our findings give insight into the internal composition of clinical information logistics both in terms of factors and weights. They also allowed us to propose a coherent model of clinical information logistics from a technical perspective that joins empirical findings with theoretical knowledge. Despite the new scheme of weights applied to the calculation of the workflow composite score, the score behaved robustly, which is yet another hint of its validity and therefore its usefulness.
Background
Against the background of a steadily increasing degree of digitalization in health care, a professional information management (IM) is required to successfully plan, implement, and evaluate information technology (IT). At its core, IM has to ensure a high quality of health data and health information systems to support patient care.
Objectives
The goal of the present study was to define what constitutes professional IM as a construct as well as to propose a reliable and valid measurement instrument.
Methods
To develop and validate the construct of professionalism of information management (PIM) and itsmeasurement, a stepwise approach followed an established procedure from information systems and behavioral research. The procedure included an analysis of the pertaining literature and expert rounds on the construct and the
instrument, two consecutive and comprehensive surveys at the national and international level, exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses as well as reliability and validity testing.
Results
Professionalism of information management was developed as a construct consisting of the three dimensions of strategic, tactical, and operational IMas well as of the regularity and cyclical phases of IM procedures as the two elements of professionalism.
The PIM instrument operationalized the construct providing items that incorporated IM procedures along the three dimensions and cyclical phases. These procedures had to be evaluated against their degree of regularity in the instrument. The instrument proved to be reliable and valid in two consecutive measurement phases
and across three countries.
Conclusion
It can be concluded that professionalism of information management is a meaningful construct that can be operationalized in a scientifically rigorous manner. Both science and practice can benefit from these developments in terms of improved self-assessment, benchmarking capabilities, and eventually, obtaining a better understanding of health IT maturity.