1
|
Chishtie J, Sapiro N, Wiebe N, Rabatach L, Lorenzetti D, Leung AA, Rabi D, Quan H, Eastwood CA. Use of Epic Electronic Health Record System for Health Care Research: Scoping Review. J Med Internet Res 2023; 25:e51003. [PMID: 38100185 PMCID: PMC10757236 DOI: 10.2196/51003] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/20/2023] [Revised: 10/29/2023] [Accepted: 11/05/2023] [Indexed: 12/18/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Electronic health records (EHRs) enable health data exchange across interconnected systems from varied settings. Epic is among the 5 leading EHR providers and is the most adopted EHR system across the globe. Despite its global reach, there is a gap in the literature detailing how EHR systems such as Epic have been used for health care research. OBJECTIVE The objective of this scoping review is to synthesize the available literature on use cases of the Epic EHR for research in various areas of clinical and health sciences. METHODS We used established scoping review methods and searched 9 major information repositories, including databases and gray literature sources. To categorize the research data, we developed detailed criteria for 5 major research domains to present the results. RESULTS We present a comprehensive picture of the method types in 5 research domains. A total of 4669 articles were screened by 2 independent reviewers at each stage, while 206 articles were abstracted. Most studies were from the United States, with a sharp increase in volume from the year 2015 onwards. Most articles focused on clinical care, health services research and clinical decision support. Among research designs, most studies used longitudinal designs, followed by interventional studies implemented at single sites in adult populations. Important facilitators and barriers to the use of Epic and EHRs in general were identified. Important lessons to the use of Epic and other EHRs for research purposes were also synthesized. CONCLUSIONS The Epic EHR provides a wide variety of functions that are helpful toward research in several domains, including clinical and population health, quality improvement, and the development of clinical decision support tools. As Epic is reported to be the most globally adopted EHR, researchers can take advantage of its various system features, including pooled data, integration of modules and developing decision support tools. Such research opportunities afforded by the system can contribute to improving quality of care, building health system efficiencies, and conducting population-level studies. Although this review is limited to the Epic EHR system, the larger lessons are generalizable to other EHRs.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jawad Chishtie
- Center for Health Informatics, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada
- Alberta Health Services, Calgary, AB, Canada
| | - Natalie Sapiro
- Center for Health Informatics, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada
| | - Natalie Wiebe
- Center for Health Informatics, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada
- Alberta Health Services, Calgary, AB, Canada
| | | | - Diane Lorenzetti
- Community Health Sciences, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada
- Health Sciences Library, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada
| | - Alexander A Leung
- Community Health Sciences, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada
- Department of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada
| | - Doreen Rabi
- Community Health Sciences, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada
- Department of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada
| | - Hude Quan
- Center for Health Informatics, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada
- Community Health Sciences, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada
| | - Cathy A Eastwood
- Center for Health Informatics, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada
- Community Health Sciences, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Hempel S, Bolshakova M, Turner BJ, Dinalo J, Rose D, Motala A, Fu N, Clemesha CG, Rubenstein L, Stockdale S. Evidence-Based Quality Improvement: a Scoping Review of the Literature. J Gen Intern Med 2022; 37:4257-4267. [PMID: 36175760 PMCID: PMC9708973 DOI: 10.1007/s11606-022-07602-5] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/04/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Quality improvement (QI) initiatives often reflect approaches based on anecdotal evidence, but it is unclear how initiatives can best incorporate scientific literature and methods into the QI process. Review of studies of QI initiatives that aim to systematically incorporate evidence review (termed evidence-based quality improvement (EBQI)) may provide a basis for further methodological development. METHODS In this scoping review (registration: https://osf.io/hr5bj ) of EBQI, we searched the databases PubMed, CINAHL, and SCOPUS. The review addressed three central questions: How is EBQI defined? How is evidence used to inform evidence-informed QI initiatives? What is the effectiveness of EBQI? RESULTS We identified 211 publications meeting inclusion criteria. In total, 170 publications explicitly used the term "EBQI." Published definitions emphasized relying on evidence throughout the QI process. We reviewed a subset of 67 evaluations of QI initiatives in primary care, including both studies that used the term "EBQI" with those that described an evidence-based initiative without using EBQI terminology. The most frequently reported EBQI components included use of evidence to identify previously tested effective QI interventions; engaging stakeholders; iterative intervention development; partnering with frontline clinicians; and data-driven evaluation of the QI intervention. Effectiveness estimates were positive but varied in size in ten studies that provided data on patient health outcomes. CONCLUSIONS EBQI is a promising strategy for integrating relevant prior scientific findings and methods systematically in the QI process, from the initial developmental phase of the IQ initiative through to its evaluation. Future QI researchers and practitioners can use these findings as the basis for further development of QI initiatives.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Susanne Hempel
- Southern California Evidence Review Center, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, USA.,Gehr Family Center for Health Systems Science and Innovation, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, USA.,RAND Health, RAND Corporation, Santa Monica, CA, USA
| | - Maria Bolshakova
- Southern California Evidence Review Center, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, USA
| | - Barbara J Turner
- Gehr Family Center for Health Systems Science and Innovation, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, USA
| | | | - Danielle Rose
- Center for the Study of Healthcare Innovation, Implementation & Policy, VA Greater Los Angeles Healthcare System, Los Angeles, CA, USA
| | - Aneesa Motala
- Southern California Evidence Review Center, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, USA.,Gehr Family Center for Health Systems Science and Innovation, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, USA.,RAND Health, RAND Corporation, Santa Monica, CA, USA
| | - Ning Fu
- Southern California Evidence Review Center, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, USA. .,School of Economics, Shanghai University of Finance and Economics, Shanghai, China.
| | | | | | - Susan Stockdale
- Center for the Study of Healthcare Innovation, Implementation & Policy, VA Greater Los Angeles Healthcare System, Los Angeles, CA, USA
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Zipperer L, Ryan R, Jones B. Alcoholism and American healthcare: The case for a patient safety approach. JOURNAL OF PATIENT SAFETY AND RISK MANAGEMENT 2022. [DOI: 10.1177/25160435221117952] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/15/2022]
Abstract
Alcoholism, more professionally termed alcohol use disorder (AUD), is a widespread and costly behavioral health condition. The aims of this paper are draw attention to systemic gaps in care for patients with AUD and advocate for patient safety leaders to partner with both the mainstream medical and substance abuse treatment communities to reduce harm in this patient population. The authors performed a narrative review of the literature on the current state of AUD treatment and patient safety, finding extensive evidence that patients with AUD usually go undiagnosed, unreferred and untreated. When they do receive AUD treatment, little evidence was found to indicate that a patient safety approach is incorporated into their care. Behavioral medicine is virgin territory for the patient safety movement. Medical care and behavioral medicine in the United States currently constitute two separate and unequal systems generally lacking in pathways of communication or care coordination for AUD patients. Significant barriers include institutional culture, individual and systemic bias against those with AUD, and health care infrastructure, especially the separation of medical and behavioral treatment. It is the authors’ conclusion that care of patients with AUD is unsafe. We advocate for the patient safety approach common in American hospitals to be extended to AUD treatment. Experienced patient safety leaders are in the strongest position to initiate collaboration between the mainstream medical and substance abuse treatment communities to reduce harm for this patient population.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Lorri Zipperer
- Blaisdell Medical Library, University of California Davis, Albuquerque, NM, USA
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
4
|
Willis VC, Thomas Craig KJ, Jabbarpour Y, Scheufele EL, Arriaga YE, Ajinkya M, Rhee KB, Bazemore A. Digital Health Interventions to Enhance Prevention in Primary Care: Scoping Review. JMIR Med Inform 2022; 10:e33518. [PMID: 35060909 PMCID: PMC8817213 DOI: 10.2196/33518] [Citation(s) in RCA: 18] [Impact Index Per Article: 9.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/10/2021] [Revised: 11/19/2021] [Accepted: 12/04/2021] [Indexed: 12/20/2022] Open
Abstract
Background Disease prevention is a central aspect of primary care practice and is comprised of primary (eg, vaccinations), secondary (eg, screenings), tertiary (eg, chronic condition monitoring), and quaternary (eg, prevention of overmedicalization) levels. Despite rapid digital transformation of primary care practices, digital health interventions (DHIs) in preventive care have yet to be systematically evaluated. Objective This review aimed to identify and describe the scope and use of current DHIs for preventive care in primary care settings. Methods A scoping review to identify literature published from 2014 to 2020 was conducted across multiple databases using keywords and Medical Subject Headings terms covering primary care professionals, prevention and care management, and digital health. A subgroup analysis identified relevant studies conducted in US primary care settings, excluding DHIs that use the electronic health record (EHR) as a retrospective data capture tool. Technology descriptions, outcomes (eg, health care performance and implementation science), and study quality as per Oxford levels of evidence were abstracted. Results The search yielded 5274 citations, of which 1060 full-text articles were identified. Following a subgroup analysis, 241 articles met the inclusion criteria. Studies primarily examined DHIs among health information technologies, including EHRs (166/241, 68.9%), clinical decision support (88/241, 36.5%), telehealth (88/241, 36.5%), and multiple technologies (154/241, 63.9%). DHIs were predominantly used for tertiary prevention (131/241, 54.4%). Of the core primary care functions, comprehensiveness was addressed most frequently (213/241, 88.4%). DHI users were providers (205/241, 85.1%), patients (111/241, 46.1%), or multiple types (89/241, 36.9%). Reported outcomes were primarily clinical (179/241, 70.1%), and statistically significant improvements were common (192/241, 79.7%). Results were summarized across the following 5 topics for the most novel/distinct DHIs: population-centered, patient-centered, care access expansion, panel-centered (dashboarding), and application-driven DHIs. The quality of the included studies was moderate to low. Conclusions Preventive DHIs in primary care settings demonstrated meaningful improvements in both clinical and nonclinical outcomes, and across user types; however, adoption and implementation in the US were limited primarily to EHR platforms, and users were mainly clinicians receiving alerts regarding care management for their patients. Evaluations of negative results, effects on health disparities, and many other gaps remain to be explored.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Van C Willis
- Center for Artificial Intelligence, Research, and Evaluation, IBM Watson Health, Cambridge, MA, United States
| | - Kelly Jean Thomas Craig
- Center for Artificial Intelligence, Research, and Evaluation, IBM Watson Health, Cambridge, MA, United States
| | - Yalda Jabbarpour
- Policy Studies in Family Medicine and Primary Care, The Robert Graham Center, American Academy of Family Physicians, Washington, DC, United States
| | - Elisabeth L Scheufele
- Center for Artificial Intelligence, Research, and Evaluation, IBM Watson Health, Cambridge, MA, United States
| | - Yull E Arriaga
- Center for Artificial Intelligence, Research, and Evaluation, IBM Watson Health, Cambridge, MA, United States
| | - Monica Ajinkya
- Policy Studies in Family Medicine and Primary Care, The Robert Graham Center, American Academy of Family Physicians, Washington, DC, United States
| | - Kyu B Rhee
- Center for Artificial Intelligence, Research, and Evaluation, IBM Watson Health, Cambridge, MA, United States
| | - Andrew Bazemore
- The American Board of Family Medicine, Lexington, KY, United States
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Guise JM, Reid E, Fiordalisi CV, Borsky A, Chang S. AHRQ Series on Improving Translation of Evidence: Progress and Promise in Supporting Learning Health Systems. Jt Comm J Qual Patient Saf 2021; 46:51-52. [PMID: 31885357 DOI: 10.1016/j.jcjq.2019.10.008] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/09/2023]
|
6
|
AHRQ Series on Improving Translation of Evidence: Perceived Value of Translational Products by the AHRQ EPC Learning Health Systems Panel. Jt Comm J Qual Patient Saf 2020; 45:772-778. [PMID: 31668330 DOI: 10.1016/j.jcjq.2019.08.002] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/01/2019] [Revised: 08/02/2019] [Accepted: 08/02/2019] [Indexed: 11/22/2022]
|
7
|
Fiordalisi C, Borsky A, Chang S, Guise JM. AHRQ EPC Series on Improving Translation of Evidence into Practice for the Learning Health System: Introduction. Jt Comm J Qual Patient Saf 2020; 45:558-565. [PMID: 31378276 DOI: 10.1016/j.jcjq.2019.05.006] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/25/2019] [Revised: 05/08/2019] [Accepted: 05/16/2019] [Indexed: 11/28/2022]
|
8
|
Flores EJ, Jue JJ, Giradi G, Schoelles K, Mull NK, Umscheid CA. AHRQ EPC Series on Improving Translation of Evidence: Use of a Clinical Pathway for C. Difficile Treatment to Facilitate the Translation of Research Findings into Practice. Jt Comm J Qual Patient Saf 2019; 45:822-828. [PMID: 31672660 DOI: 10.1016/j.jcjq.2019.10.002] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/15/2019] [Revised: 10/10/2019] [Accepted: 10/10/2019] [Indexed: 11/25/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND In 2018 the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) Evidence-based Practice Center (EPC) Program issued a call for strategies to disseminate AHRQ EPC systematic reviews. In this pilot, findings from the 2016 AHRQ EPC report on Clostridioides difficile infection were translated into a treatment pathway and disseminated via a cloud-based platform and electronic health record (EHR). METHODS An existing 10-step framework was used for developing and disseminating evidence-based clinical pathways. The development of the EHR intervention was informed by the Five Rights model for clinical decision support and human-computer interaction design heuristics. The researchers used observations and time measurements to describe the impact of the EPC report on pathway development and examined provider adoption using counts of pathway views. RESULTS Two main themes emerged: (1) discrepancies between the EPC report and existing guidelines prompted critical discussions about available treatments, and (2) lack of guideline and pathway syntheses in the EPC report necessitated a rapid literature review. Pathway development required 340 hours: 205 for the rapid literature review, 63 for pathway development and EHR intervention design, and 5 for technical implementation of the intervention. Pathways were viewed 1,069 times through the cloud-based platform and 47 times through a hyperlink embedded in key EHR ordering screens. CONCLUSION Pathways can be an approach for disseminating AHRQ EPC report findings within health care systems; however, reports should include guideline and pathway syntheses to meet their full potential. Embedding hyperlinks to pathway content within the EHR may be a viable and low-effort solution for promoting awareness of evidence-based resources.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Emilia J Flores
- is Penn Pathways Program Manager, Penn Medicine Center for Evidence-based Practice, University of Pennsylvania Health System, Philadelphia.
| | - J Jane Jue
- is formerly Medical Director, ECRI Guidelines Trust, ECRI Institute, is Adjunct Assistant Professor, Department of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine, Philadelphia
| | - Gina Giradi
- is Project Coordinator, ECRI Institute, Plymouth Meeting, Pennslyvania
| | - Karen Schoelles
- is Vice President, Clinical Excellence and Safety, ECRI Institute
| | - Nikhil K Mull
- is Assistant Professor of Clinical Medicine, University of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine, and Director, Penn Medicine Center for Evidence-based Practice
| | - Craig A Umscheid
- is Chief Quality and Innovation Officer, Vice President for Healthcare Delivery Science, and Director of the Center for Healthcare Delivery Science and Innovation, University of Chicago Medicine
| |
Collapse
|