Sociotechnical challenges to developing technologies for patient access to health information exchange data

Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association

Volumn 21, Issue 4, 2014, Pages 664-670

  Ancker, Jessica S ^a,b   Miller, Melissa C ^a,b   Patel, Vaishali ^c   Kaushal, Rainu ^a,b  

^a WEILL CORNELL MEDICAL COLLEGE   (United States)

^b Health Information Technology Evaluation Collaborative HITEC   (United States)

^c U S DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CONSUMER; HEALTH CARE ORGANIZATION; HEALTH CARE PERSONNEL; HUMAN; MEDICAL INFORMATICS; MEDICAL INFORMATION; PROSPECTIVE STUDY; SEMI STRUCTURED INTERVIEW;

CONSUMER HEALTH INFORMATICS; ELECTRONIC HEALTH RECORDS; HEALTH INFORMATION EXCHANGE; IMPLEMENTATION RESEARCH; PERSONAL HEALTH RECORDS; QUALITATIVE METHODS;

COMPUTER LITERACY; CONSUMER HEALTH INFORMATION; ELECTRONIC HEALTH RECORDS; HUMANS; INTERVIEWS AS TOPIC; MEDICAL INFORMATICS; MEDICAL RECORD LINKAGE; PATIENT ACCESS TO RECORDS; PROSPECTIVE STUDIES; SOCIOLOGY, MEDICAL;

EID: 84902383704     PISSN: 10675027     EISSN: 1527974X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1136/amiajnl-2013-002073     Document Type: Article

References (39)

1. The Markle Foundation. Connecting for health: a Public-Private Collaborative. The Markle Foundation, 2003.
2. Archer N, Fevrier-Thomas U, Lokker C, et al. Personal health records: a scoping review. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2011;18:515-22.
3. Ball M, Smith C, Bakalar R. Personal health records: empowering consumers. J Healthc Inf Manag 2007;21:76-86.
4. Kaelber DC, Shah S, Vincent A, et al. The value of personal health records. Charlestown, MA: Center for Information Technology Leadership, Healthcare Information and Management System Society (HIMSS), 2008.
5. Westin A. Americans overwhelmingly believe electronic personal health records could improve their health. Connecting for health. Markle Foundation, 2008:1-7.
6. Koh H, Brach C, Harris LM, et al. A proposed 'health literate care model' would constitute a systems approach to improving patients' engagement in care. Health Aff 2013;32:357-67.
7. Ricciardi L, Mostashari F, Murphy J, et al. A national action plan to support consumer engagement via e-Health. Health Aff 2013;32:376-84.
8. Blumenthal D, Tavenner M. The "meaningful use" regulation for electronic health records. N Engl J Med 2010;363:501-4.
9. Anonymous. Notification of proposed rulemaking (health information technology: standards, implementation specifications, and certification criteria for electronic health record technology, 2014 edition; revisions to the permanent certification program for health information technology). In: Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology (ONC) DoHaHS, ed. Washington, DC: Federal Register, 2012:13832-85.
10. National Committee for Quality Assurance. Physician practice connections-patient-centered medical homeTM. Washington, DC. http://www.ncqa.org/tabid/631/Default.aspx.
11. Ancker JS, Barron Y, Rockoff M, et al. Use of an electronic patient portal among disadvantaged populations. J Gen Intern Med 2011;26:1117-23.
12. Undem T. Consumers and health information technology: a national survey. Oakland, CA: California HealthCare Foundation, 2010.
13. Conn J. Blue Button gains fans, apps. Simple tech from VA puts interoperability to work. Mod Healthc 2012;42:14.
14. Ancker JS, Carpenter K, Greene P, et al. Peer-to-peer communication, cancer prevention, and the internet. J Health Commun 2009;14:38-46.
15. Frost JH, Massagli MP. Social uses of personal health information within PatientsLikeMe, an online patient community: what can happen when patients have access to one another's data. J Med Internet Res 2008;10:e15.
16. Fox S, Brenner J. Family caregivers online. Pew internet & American life project. Washington, DC: Pew Research Center's Internet & American Life Project, 2012.
17. Fox S. The social life of health information, 2011. Pew internet & American life project. Washington, DC: Pew Research Center's Internet & American Life Project, 2011.
18. Purcell K. Half of adult cell phone users have apps on their phones. Pew Internet and Family Life Project, 2011. http://www.pewinternet.org/~/media/Files/Reports/2011/PIP_Apps-Update-11.pdf.
19. Kuperman GJ. Health information exchange: why are we doing it, and what are we doing? J Am Med Inform Assoc 2011;18:678-82.
20. Kuperman GJ, Blair JS, Franck RA, et al.; for the NHIN Trial Implementations Core Services Content Working Group. Developing data content specifications for the Nationwide Health Information Network Trial Implementations. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2010;17:6-12.
21. Kern LM, Barron Y, Abramson EL, et al. HEAL NY: promoting interoperable health information technology in New York State. Health Aff (Millwood) 2009;28:493-504.
22. Abramson EL, McGinnis S, Edwards A, et al. Electronic health record adoption and health information exchange among hospitals in New York State. J Eval Clin Pract 2012;18:1156-62.
23. Johnson KB, Gadd CS, Aronsky D, et al. The MidSouth eHealth Alliance: use and impact in the first year. AMIA Annu Symp Proc 2008:333-7.
24. Johnson KB, Unertl KM, Chen Q, et al. Health information exchange usage in emergency departments and clinics: the who, what, and why. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2011;18:690-7.
25. Vest JR, Jasperson J. How are health professionals using health information exchange systems? Measuring usage for evaluation and system improvement. J Med Syst 2012;36:3195-204.
26. EHealth Initiative. HIE Survey Report 2010-Key Findings. 2010. http://www.ehealthinitiative.org/resources/viewdownload/54/35.html (accessed 20 May 2013).
27. Lohr S. Google to end health record service after it fails to attract users. The New York Times June 24, 2011.
28. Heeks R. Health information systems: failure, success and improvisation. Int J Med Inform 2006;75:125-37.
29. Wears RL, Berg M. Computer technology and clinical work: still waiting for Godot. JAMA 2005;293:1261-63.
30. Kaplan B, Harris-Salamone KD. Health IT success and failure: recommendations from literature and an AMIA workshop. JAMIA 2009;16:291-99.
31. Brender J, Ammenwerth E, Nykänen P, et al. Factors influencing success and failure of health informatics systems: a pilot Delphi study. Methods Inf Med 2006;45:125-36.
32. Gaskin GL, Longhurst CA, Slayton R, et al. Sociotechnical challenges of developing an interoperable personal health record: lessons learned. Appl Clin Inform 2011;2:406-19.
33. Strauss A, Corbin J. Basics of qualitative research: techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory, 2nd edn. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 1998.
34. Lincoln YS, Guba EG. Naturalistic inquiry. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications, Inc, 1985.
35. Anonymous. Privacy and security policies and procedures for RHIOs and their participants in New York State, v 2.2. The statewide collaborative process. Albany, NY: New York eHealth Collaborative and the New York State Department of Health, 2010. http://nyehealth.org/images/files/File_Repository16/pdf/final%20pps%20v2. 2%204.1.11.pdf (accessed 2 Sep 2012).
36. Ancker JS, Miller MC, Hegde S, et al. Usability testing of a novel system for patient-provider messaging in a health information exchange environment. AMIA Annu Symp Proc 2012.
37. Pritts J, Lewis S, Jacobson R, et al. Privacy and security solutions for interoperable health information exchange. Report on state law requirements for patient permission to disclose health information; Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, 2009.
38. Beard L, Schein R, Morra D, et al. The challenges in making electronic health records accessible to patients. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2012;19: 116-20.
39. Heckathorn D. Respondent-driven sampling: a new approach to the study of hidden populations. Soc Problems 1997;44:174-99.