Article
Refine
Year of publication
Document Type
- Article (27) (remove)
Language
- English (27) (remove)
Is part of the Bibliography
- yes (27) (remove)
Keywords
- COVID-19 (2)
- eHealth (2)
- health information technology (2)
- Bass model (1)
- Clinical handover (1)
- Common ground (1)
- Communication (1)
- Computerized patient records (1)
- Continuity of care (1)
- Cross-country comparison (1)
Institute
- Fakultät WiSo (26)
Background
Digital health technologies enable patients to make a personal contribution to the improvement of their health by enabling them to manage their health. In order to exploit the potential of digital health technologies, Internet-based networking between patients and health care providers is required. However, this networking and access to digital health technologies are less prevalent in sociodemographically deprived cohorts. The paper explores how the use of digital health technologies, which connect patients with health care providers and health insurers has changed during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Methods
The data from a German-based cross-sectional online study conducted between April 29 and May 8, 2020, were used for this purpose. A total of 1.570 participants were included in the study. Accordingly, the influence of sociodemographic determinants, subjective perceptions, and personal competencies will affect the use of online booking of medical appointments and medications, video consultations with providers, and the data transmission to health insurers via an app.
Results
The highest level of education (OR 1.806) and the presence of a chronic illness (OR 1.706) particularly increased the likelihood of using online booking. With regard to data transmission via an app to a health insurance company, the strongest increase in the probability of use was shown by belonging to the highest subjective social status (OR 1.757) and generation Y (OR 2.303). Furthermore, the results show that the higher the subjectively perceived restriction of the subjects' life situation was due to the COVID-19 pandemic, the higher the relative probability of using online booking (OR 1.103) as well as data transmission via an app to a health insurance company (OR 1.113). In addition, higher digital literacy contributes to the use of online booking (OR 1.033) and data transmission via an app to the health insurer (OR 1.034).
Conclusions
Socially determined differences can be identified for the likelihood of using digital technologies in health care, which persist even under restrictive conditions during the COVID-19 pandemic. Thus, the results indicate a digital divide with regard to the technologies investigated in this study.
Background:
Chronic health conditions are on the rise and are putting high economic pressure on health systems, as they require well-coordinated prevention and treatment. Among chronic conditions, chronic wounds such as cardiovascular leg ulcers have a high prevalence. Their treatment is highly interdisciplinary and regularly spans multiple care settings and organizations; this places particularly high demands on interoperable information exchange that can be achieved using international semantic standards, such as Systematized Nomenclature of Medicine-Clinical Terms (SNOMED CT).
Objective:
This study aims to investigate the expressiveness of SNOMED CT in the domain of wound care, and thereby its clinical usefulness and the potential need for extensions.
Methods:
A clinically consented and profession-independent wound care item set, the German National Consensus for the Documentation of Leg Wounds (NKDUC), was mapped onto the precoordinated concepts of the international reference terminology SNOMED CT. Before the mapping took place, the NKDUC was transformed into an information model that served to systematically identify relevant items. The mapping process was carried out in accordance with the ISO/TR 12300 formalism. As a result, the reliability, equivalence, and coverage rate were determined for all NKDUC items and sections.
Results:
The developed information model revealed 268 items to be mapped. Conducted by 3 health care professionals, the mapping resulted in moderate reliability (κ=0.512). Regarding the two best equivalence categories (symmetrical equivalence of meaning), the coverage rate of SNOMED CT was 67.2% (180/268) overall and 64.3% (108/168) specifically for wounds. The sections general medical condition (55/66, 83%), wound assessment (18/24, 75%), and wound status (37/57, 65%), showed higher coverage rates compared with the sections therapy (45/73, 62%), wound diagnostics (8/14, 57%), and patient demographics (17/34, 50%).
Conclusions:
The results yielded acceptable reliability values for the mapping procedure. The overall coverage rate shows that two-thirds of the items could be mapped symmetrically, which is a substantial portion of the source item set. Some wound care sections, such as general medical conditions and wound assessment, were covered better than other sections (wound status, diagnostics, and therapy). These deficiencies can be mitigated either by postcoordination or by the inclusion of new concepts in SNOMED CT. This study contributes to pushing interoperability in the domain of wound care, thereby responding to the high demand for information exchange in this field. Overall, this study adds another puzzle piece to the general knowledge about SNOMED CT in terms of its clinical usefulness and its need for further extensions.
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.
Information Technology (IT) continues to evolve and develop with electronic devices and systems becoming integral to healthcare in every country. This has led to an urgent need for all professions working in healthcare to be knowledgeable and skilled in informatics. The Technology Informatics Guiding Education Reform (TIGER) Initiative was established in 2006 in the United States to develop key areas of informatics in nursing. One of these was to integrate informatics competencies into nursing curricula and life-long learning. In 2009, TIGER developed an informatics competency framework which outlines numerous IT competencies required for professional practice and this work helped increase the emphasis of informatics in nursing education standards in the United States. In 2012, TIGER expanded to the international community to help synthesise informatics competencies for nurses and pool educational resources in health IT. This transition led to a new interprofessional, interdisciplinary approach, as health informatics education needs to expand to other clinical fields and beyond.
In tandem, a European Union (EU) - United States (US) Collaboration on eHealth began a strand of work which focuses on developing the IT skills of the health workforce to ensure technology can be adopted and applied in healthcare. One initiative within this is the EU*US eHealth Work Project, which started in 2016 and is mapping the current structure and gaps in health IT skills and training needs globally. It aims to increase educational opportunities by developing a model for open and scalable access to eHealth training programmes. With this renewed initiative to incorporate informatics into the education and training of nurses and other health professionals globally, it is time for educators, researchers, practitioners and policy makers to join in and ROAR with TIGER.
Background:
While aiming for the same goal of building a national eHealth Infrastructure, Germany and the United States pursued different strategic approaches – particularly regarding the role of promoting the adoption and usage of hospital Electronic Health Records (EHR).
Objective:
To measure and model the diffusion dynamics of EHRs in German hospital care and to contrast the results with the developments in the US.
Materials and methods:
All acute care hospitals that were members of the German statutory health system were surveyed during the period 2007–2017 for EHR adoption. Bass models were computed based on the German data and the corresponding data of the American Hospital Association (AHA) from non-federal hospitals in order to model and explain the diffusion of innovation.
Results:
While the diffusion dynamics observed in the US resembled the typical s-shaped curve with high imitation effects (q = 0.583) but with a relatively low innovation effect (p = 0.025), EHR diffusion in Germany stagnated with adoption rates of approx. 50% (imitation effect q = -0.544) despite a higher innovation effect (p = 0.303).
Discussion:
These findings correlate with different governmental strategies in the US and Germany of financially supporting EHR adoption. Imitation only seems to work if there are financial incentives, e.g. those of the HITECH Act in the US. They are lacking in Germany, where the government left health IT adoption strategies solely to the free market and the consensus among all of the stakeholders.
Conclusion:
Bass diffusion models proved to be useful for distinguishing the diffusion dynamics in German and US non-federal hospitals. When applying the Bass model, the imitation parameter needs a broader interpretation beyond the network effects, including driving forces such as incentives and regulations, as was demonstrated by this study.
The TIGER Initiative
(2016)
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.
Objectives: This study aimed at the construction of what the core of eHealth policy making is, offering new perspectives about high priority procedures along the policy making process
Methods: Following Grounded Theory methodology, 59 qualitative telephone interviews with a broad variety of stakeholders from Austria, Switzerland and Germany were conducted
Results: The findings hinted at five priorities of eHealth policy making: strategy, consensus-building, decision-making, implementation and evaluation that emerged from the stakeholders’ perception of the eHealth policy. Hereby strategy, consensus-building and implementation gained the highest attention
Conclusions: These findings suggest three high priorities in eHealth policy: 1) developing and pursuing a consistent eHealth strategy, 2) investing time and resources into consensus-building to clear up difficulties early on in the process, 3) governing implementation towards serving patient care through systems fit for practice.
Public Interest Summary: Digitalisation is playing an increasingly crucial role in providing high quality health care. However, different countries have pursued different political paths. In this study, we wanted to know how the stakeholders perceived the political process in their country to identify strengths and weaknesses. We, therefore, conducted interviews about digital health policy with experts from Austria, Switzerland and Germany covering the full spectrum of stakeholders. The findings suggest three political musts: 1) a convincing and coherent strategy followed throughout the entire process, 2) consensus- building among the stakeholders, 3) using “fit for practice” as the yardstick to measure political success.
Introduction: Establishing continuity of care in handovers at changes of shift is a challenging endeavor that is jeopardized by time pressure and errors typically occurring during synchronous communication. Only if the outgoing and incoming persons manage to collaboratively build a common ground for the next steps of care is it possible to ensure a proper continuation. Electronic systems, in particular electronic patient record systems, are powerful providers of information but their actual use might threaten achieving a common understanding of the patient if they force clinicians to work asynchronously. In order to gain a deeper understanding of communication failures and how to overcome them, we performed a systematic review of the literature, aiming to answer the following four research questions: (1a) What are typical errors and (1b) their consequences in handovers? (2) How can they be overcome by conventional strategies and instruments? (3) electronic systems? (4) Are there any instruments to support collaborative grounding?
Methods: We searched the databases MEDLINE, CINAHL, and COCHRANE for articles on handovers in general and in combination with the terms electronic record systems and grounding that covered the time period of January 2000 to May 2012.
Results: The search led to 519 articles of which 60 were then finally included into the review. We found a sharp increase in the number of relevant studies starting with 2008. As could be documented by 20 studies that addressed communication errors, omission of detailed patient information including anticipatory guidance during handovers was the greatest problem. This deficiency could be partly overcome by structuring and systematizing the information, e.g. according to Situation, Background, Assessment and Recommendation schema (SBAR), and by employing electronic tools integrated in electronic records systems as 23 studies on conventional and 22 articles on electronic systems showed. Despite the increase in quantity and quality of the information achieved, it also became clear that there was still the unsolved problem of anticipatory guidance and presenting “the full story” of the patient. Only a small number of studies actually addressed how to establish common ground with the help of electronic tools.
Discussion: The increase in studies manifests the rise of great interest in the handover scenario. Electronic patient record systems proved to be excellent information feeders to handover tools, but their role in collaborative grounding is unclear. Concepts of how to move to joint information processing and IT-enabled social interaction have to be implemented and tested.
Background: Continuous improvements of IT-performance in healthcare organisations require actionable performance indicators, regularly conducted, independent measurements and meaningful and scalable reference groups. Existing IT-benchmarking initiatives have focussed on the development of reliable and valid indicators, but less on the questions about how to implement an environment for conducting easily repeatable and scalable IT-benchmarks.
Objectives: This study aims at developing and trialling a procedure that meets the afore-mentioned requirements.
Methods: We chose a well established, regularly conducted (inter-) national IT-survey of healthcare organisations (IT-Report Healthcare) as the environment and offered the participants of the 2011 survey (CIOs of hospitals) to enter a benchmark. The 61 structural and functional performance indicators covered among others the implementation status and integration of IT-systems and functions, global user satisfaction and the resources of the IT-department. Healthcare organisations were grouped by size and ownership. The benchmark results were made available electronically and feedback on the use of these results was requested after several months.
Results: Fifty-ninehospitals participated in the benchmarking. Reference groups consisted of up to 141 members depending on the number of beds (size) and the ownership (public vs. private). A total of 122 charts showing single indicator frequency views were sent to each participant. The evaluation showed that 94.1% of the CIOs who participated in the evaluation considered this benchmarking beneficial and reported that they would enter again. Based on the feedback of the participants we developed two additional views that provide a more consolidated picture.
Conclusion: The results demonstrate that establishing an independent, easily repeatable and scalable IT-benchmarking procedure is possible and was deemed desirable. Based on these encouraging results a new benchmarking round which includes process indicators is currently conducted.
Objectives: eHealth and innovation are often regarded as synonyms - not least because eHealth technologies and applications are new to their users. This position paper challenges this view and aims at exploring the nature of eHealth innovation against the background of common definitions of innovation and facts from the biomedical and health informatics literature. A good understanding of what constitutes innovative eHealth developments allows the degree of innovation to be measured and interpreted.
Methods: To this end, relevant biomedical and health informatics literature was searched mainly in Medline and ACM digital library. This paper presents seven facts about implementing and applying new eHealth developments hereby drawing on the experience published in the literature.
Results: The facts are: 1. eHealth innovation is relative. 2. Advanced clinical practice is the yardstick. 3. Only used and usable eHealth technology can give birth to eHealth innovatio. 4. One new single eHealth function does not make a complex eHealth innovation. 5. eHealth innovation is more evolution than revolution. 6. eHealth innovation is often triggered behind the scenes; and 7. There is no eHealth innovation without sociocultural change.
Conclusions: The main conclusion of the seven facts is that eHealth innovations have many ingredients: newness, availability, advanced clinical practice with proven outcomes, use and usability, the supporting environment, other context factors and the stakeholder perspectives. Measuring eHealth innovation is thus a complex matter. To this end we propose the development of a composite score that expresses comprehensively the nature of eHealth innovation and that breaks down its complexity into the three dimensions: i) eHealth adoption, ii) partnership with advanced clinical practice, and iii) use and usability of eHealth. In order to better understand the momentum and mechanisms behind eHealth innovation the fourth dimension, iv) eHealth supporting services and means, needs to be studied. Conceptualising appropriate measurement instruments also requires eHealth innovation to be distinguished from eHealth sophistication, performance and quality, although innovation is intertwined with these concepts. The demanding effort for defining eHealth innovation and measuring it properly seem worthwhile and promise advances in creating better systems. This paper thus intends to stimulate the necessary discussion.
Background: Clinical handovers at changes of shifts are typical scenarios of time restricted and information intensive communication, which are highly cognitively demanding. The currently available applications supporting handovers typically present complex information in a textual checklist-like manner. This presentation style has been criticised for not meeting the specific user requirements.
Objectives: We, therefore, aimed at developing a concept for visualising the overview of a clinical case that serves as an alternative way to checklist-like presentations in clinical handovers. We also aimed at implementing this concept in a handoverEHR in order to support the pre-handover phase, the actual handover, and the post-handover phase as well as at evaluating its usability and attractiveness.
Results: We developed and implemented a concept that draws on Tolman's pioneering work on cognitive maps that we designed in accordance with Gestalt principles. These maps provide a pictorial overview of a clinical case. The application to build, manipulate, and store the cognitive maps was integrated into an openEHR based handover record that extends conventional records with handover specific information. Usability (n = 28) and attractiveness (n = 26) testing with experienced clinicians resulted in good ratings for suitability for the task as well as for attractiveness and pragmatism.
Conclusion: We propose cognitive maps to represent and visualise the clinical case in situations where there is limited time to present complex information.
The demand for evidence-based health informatics and benchmarking of 'good' information systems in health care gives an opportunity to continue reporting on recent papers in the German journal GMS Medical Informatics, Biometry and Epidemiology (MIBE) here. The publications in focus deal with a comparison of benchmarking initiatives in German-speaking countries, use of communication standards in telemonitoring scenarios, the estimation of national cancer incidence rates and modifications of parametric tests. Furthermore papers in this issue of MIM are introduced which originally have been presented at the Annual Conference of the German Society of Medical Informatics, Biometry and Epidemiology. They deal as well with evidence and evaluation of 'good' information systems but also with data harmonization, surveillance in obstetrics, adaptive designs and parametrical testing in statistical analysis, patient registries and signal processing.
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.
Objective: To pilot benchmark measures of health information and communication technology (ICT) availability and use to facilitate cross-country learning.
Materials and Methods: A prior Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development–led effort involving 30 countries selected and defined functionality-based measures for availability and use of electronic health records, health information exchange, personal health records, and telehealth. In this pilot, an Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development Working Group compiled results for 38 countries for a subset of measures with broad coverage using new and/or adapted country-specific or multinational surveys and other sources from 2012 to 2015. We also synthesized country learnings to inform future benchmarking.
Results: While electronic records are widely used to store and manage patient information at the point of care—all but 2 pilot countries reported use by at least half of primary care physicians; many had rates above 75%—patient information exchange across organizations/settings is less common. Large variations in the availability and use of telehealth and personal health records also exist.
Discussion: Pilot participation demonstrated interest in cross-national benchmarking. Using the most comparable measures available to date, it showed substantial diversity in health ICT availability and use in all domains. The project also identified methodological considerations (e.g., structural and health systems issues that can affect measurement) important for future comparisons.
Conclusion: While health policies and priorities differ, many nations aim to increase access, quality, and/or efficiency of care through effective ICT use. By identifying variations and describing key contextual factors, benchmarking offers the potential to facilitate cross-national learning and accelerate the progress of individual countries.
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: For more than 30 years, there has been close cooperation between Japanese and German scientists with regard to information systems in health care. Collaboration has been formalized by an agreement between the respective scientific associations. Following this agreement, two joint workshops took place to explore the similarities and differences of electronic health record systems (EHRS) against the background of the two national healthcare systems that share many commonalities.
Objectives: To establish a framework and requirements for the quality of EHRS that may also serve as a basis for comparing different EHRS.
Methods: Donabedian's three dimensions of quality of medical care were adapted to the outcome, process, and structural quality of EHRS and their management. These quality dimensions were proposed before the first workshop of EHRS experts and enriched during the discussions.
Results: The Quality Requirements Framework of EHRS (QRF-EHRS) was defined and complemented by requirements for high quality EHRS. The framework integrates three quality dimensions (outcome, process, and structural quality), three layers of information systems (processes and data, applications, and physical tools) and three dimensions of information management (strategic, tactical, and operational information management).
Conclusions: Describing and comparing the quality of EHRS is in fact a multidimensional problem as given by the QRF-EHRS framework. This framework will be utilized to compare Japanese and German EHRS, notably those that were presented at the second workshop.
Background: While health informatics recommendations on competencies and education serve as highly desirable corridors for designing curricula and courses, they cannot show how the content should be situated in a specific and local context. Therefore, global and local perspectives need to be reconciled in a common framework.
Objectives: The primary aim of this study is therefore to empirically define and validate a framework of globally accepted core competency areas in health informatics and to enrich this framework with exemplar information derived from local educational settings.
Methods: To this end, (i) a survey was deployed and yielded insights from 43 nursing experts from 21 countries worldwide to measure the relevance of the core competency areas, (ii) a workshop at the International Nursing Informatics Conference (NI2016) held in June 2016 to provide information about the validation and clustering of these areas and (iii) exemplar case studies were compiled to match these findings with the practice. The survey was designed based on a comprehensive compilation of competencies from the international literature in medical and health informatics.
Results: The resulting recommendation framework consists of 24 core competency areas in health informatics defined for five major nursing roles. These areas were clustered in the domains “data, information, knowledge”, “information exchange and information sharing”, “ethical and legal issues”, “systems life cycle management”, “management” and “biostatistics and medical technology”, all of which showed high reliability values. The core competency areas were ranked by relevance and validated by a different group of experts. Exemplar case studies from Brazil, Germany, New Zealand, Taiwan/China, United Kingdom (Scotland) and the United States of America expanded on the competencies described in the core competency areas.
Conclusions: This international recommendation framework for competencies in health informatics directed at nurses provides a grid of knowledge for teachers and learner alike that is instantiated with knowledge about informatics competencies, professional roles, priorities and practical, local experience. It also provides a methodology for developing frameworks for other professions/disciplines. Finally, this framework lays the foundation of cross-country learning in health informatics education for nurses and other health professionals.
While Nursing Informatics competencies seem essential for the daily work of nurses, they are not formally integrated into nursing education in Austria, Germany and Switzerland, nor are there any national educational recommendations. The aim of this paper is to show how such recommendations can be developed, what competency areas are most relevant in the three countries and how the recommendations can be implemented in practice. To this end, a triple iterative procedure was proposed and applied starting with national health informatics recommendations for other professionals, matching and enriching these findings with topics from the international literature and finally validating them in an expert survey with 87 experts and in focus group sessions. Out of the 24 compiled competency areas, the relevance ratings of the following four recommended areas achieved values above 90%: nursing documentation (including terminologies), principles of nursing informatics, data protection and security, and quality assurance and quality management. As there were no significant differences between the three countries, these findings laid the foundation of the DACH Recommendations of Nursing Informatics as joint German (D), Austrian (A), and Swiss (CH) recommendations in Nursing Informatics. The methodology proposed has been utilized internationally, which demonstrates the added value of this study also outside the confines of Austria, Germany, Switzerland.
Objective: The more people there are who use clinical information systems (CIS) beyond their traditional intramural confines, the more promising the benefits are, and the more daunting the risks will be. This review thus explores the areas of ethical debates prompted by CIS conceptualized as smart systems reaching out to patients and citizens. Furthermore, it investigates the ethical competencies and education needed to use these systems appropriately.
Methods: A literature review covering ethics topics in combination with clinical and health information systems, clinical decision support, health information exchange, and various mobile devices and media was performed searching the MEDLINE database for articles from 2016 to 2019 with a focus on 2018 and 2019. A second search combined these keywords with education.
Results: By far, most of the discourses were dominated by privacy, confidentiality, and informed consent issues. Intertwined with confidentiality and clear boundaries, the provider-patient relationship has gained much attention. The opacity of algorithms and the lack of explicability of the results pose a further challenge. The necessity of sociotechnical ethics education was underpinned in many studies including advocating education for providers and patients alike. However, only a few publications expanded on ethical competencies. In the publications found, empirical research designs were employed to capture the stakeholders’ attitudes, but not to evaluate specific implementations.
Conclusion: Despite the broad discourses, ethical values have not yet found their firm place in empirically rigorous health technology evaluation studies. Similarly, sociotechnical ethics competencies obviously need detailed specifications. These two gaps set the stage for further research at the junction of clinical information systems and ethics.