Refine
Year of publication
Document Type
- Conference Proceeding (15)
- Article (10)
- Part of a Book (1)
Has Fulltext
- no (26) (remove)
Is part of the Bibliography
- yes (26)
Keywords
- Digital (1)
- Erfolg (1)
- Innovation (1)
- Innovationsmanagement (1)
- clinical information logistics (1)
- clinical workflows (1)
- composite score (1)
- health information technology (1)
- model building (1)
Institute
- Fakultät WiSo (25)
- Fakultät IuI (1)
Multinational health IT benchmarks foster cross-country learning and have been employed at various levels, e.g. OECD and Nordic countries. A bi-national benchmark study conducted in 2007 revealed a significantly higher adoption of health IT in Austria compared to Germany, two countries with comparable healthcare systems. We now investigated whether these differences still persisted. We further studied whether these differences were associated with hospital intrinsic factors, i.e. the innovative power of the organisation and hospital demographics. We thus performed a survey to measure the “perceived IT availability” and the “innovative power of the hospital” of 464 German and 70 Austrian hospitals. The survey was based on a questionnaire with 52 items and was given to the directors of nursing in 2013/2014. Our findings confirmed a significantly greater IT availability in Austria than in Germany. This was visible in the aggregated IT adoption composite score “IT function” as well as in the IT adoption for the individual functions “nursing documentation” (OR = 5.98), “intensive care unit (ICU) documentation” (OR = 2.49), “medication administration documentation” (OR = 2.48), “electronic archive” (OR = 2.27) and “medication” (OR = 2.16). “Innovative power” was the strongest factor to explain the variance of the composite score “IT function”. It was effective in hospitals of both countries but significantly more effective in Austria than in Germany. “Hospital size” and “hospital system affiliation” were also significantly associated with the composite score “IT function”, but they did not differ between the countries. These findings can be partly associated with the national characteristics. Indicators point to a more favourable financial situation in Austrian hospitals; we thus argue that Austrian hospitals may possess a larger degree of financial freedom to be innovative and to act accordingly. This study is the first to empirically demonstrate the effect of “innovative power” in hospitals on health IT adoption in a bi-national health IT benchmark. We recommend directly including the financial situation into future regression models. On a political level, measures to stimulate the “innovative power” of hospitals should be considered to increase the digitalisation of healthcare.
Background: Clinical information logistics is the backbone of care workflows inside and outside of hospitals. Due to the great potential of health IT to support clinical processes its contribution needs to be regularly monitored and governed. IT benchmarks are a well-known instrument to optimise the availability and use of IT by guiding the decision making process. The aim of this study was to translate IT benchmarking results that were grounded on a hierarchical workflow scoring system into an appropriate visualisation concept.
Methods: To this end, a three-dimensional multi-level model was developed, which allowed the decomposition of the highly aggregated workflow composite score into score views for the individual clinical workflows concerned and for the descriptors of these workflows. Furthermore this multi-level model helped to break down the score views into single and multiple indicator views.
Results: The results could be visualised per hospital in comparison to the results of organisations of similar size and ownership (peer reference groups) and in comparison to different types of innovation adopters. The multi-level model was implemented in a benchmark of 199 hospitals and evaluated by the chief information officers. The evaluation resulted in high ratings for the comprehensibility of the different types of views of the scores and indicators.
Conclusions: The implementation of the multi-level model in a large benchmark of hospitals proved to be feasible and useful in terms of the overall structure and the different indicator views. There seems to be a preference for less complex and familiar views.
Background: Availability and usage of individual IT applications have been studied intensively in the past years. Recently, IT support of clinical processes is attaining increasing attention. The underlying construct that describes the IT support of clinical workflows is clinical information logistics. This construct needs to be better understood, operationalised and measured.
Objectives: It is therefore the aim of this study to propose and develop a workflow composite score (WCS) for measuring clinical information logistics and to examine its quality based on reliability and validity analyses.
Methods: We largely followed the procedural model of MacKenzie and colleagues (2011) for defining and conceptualising the construct domain, for developing the measurement instrument, assessing the content validity, pretesting the instrument, specifying the model, capturing the data and computing the WCS and testing the reliability and validity.
Results: Clinical information logistics was decomposed into the descriptors data and information, function, integration and distribution, which embraced the framework validated by an analysis of the international literature. This framework was refined selecting representative clinical processes. We chose ward rounds, pre- and post-surgery processes and discharge as sample processes that served as concrete instances for the measurements. They are sufficiently complex, represent core clinical processes and involve different professions, departments and settings. The score was computed on the basis of data from 183 hospitals of different size, ownership, location and teaching status. Testing the reliability and validity yielded encouraging results: the reliability was high with r(split-half) = 0.89, the WCS discriminated between groups; the WCS correlated significantly and moderately with two EHR models and the WCS received good evaluation results by a sample of chief information officers (n = 67). These findings suggest the further utilisation of the WCS.
Conclusion: As the WCS does not assume ideal workflows as a gold standard but measures IT support of clinical workflows according to validated descriptors a high portability of the WCS to other hospitals in other countries is very likely. The WCS will contribute to a better understanding of the construct clinical information logistics.