Dataset Information

Information exchange among physicians caring for the same patient in the community.

ABSTRACT:

Background

The exchange of information is an integral component of continuity of health care and may limit or prevent costly duplication of tests and treatments. This study determined the probability that patient information from previous visits with other physicians was available for a current physician visit.

Methods

We conducted a multicentre prospective cohort study including patients discharged from the medical or surgical services of 11 community and academic hospitals in Ontario. Patients included in the study saw at least 2 different physicians during the 6 months after discharge. The primary outcome was whether information from a previous visit with another physician was available at the current visit. We determined the availability of previous information using surveys of or interviews with the physicians seen during current visits.

Results

A total of 3250 patients, with a total of 39 469 previous-current visit combinations, met the inclusion criteria. Overall, information about the previous visit was available 22.0% of the time. Information was more likely to be available if the current doctor was a family physician (odds ratio [OR] 1.75, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.54-1.98) or a physician who had treated the patient before the hospital admission (OR 1.33, 95% CI 1.21-1.46). Conversely, information was less likely to be available if the previous doctor was a family physician (OR 0.38, 95% CI 0.32-0.44) or a physician who had treated the patient before the admission (OR 0.72, 95% CI 0.60-0.86). The strongest predictor of information exchange was the current physician having previously received information about the patient from the previous physician (OR 7.72, 95% CI 6.92-8.63).

Interpretation

Health care information is often not shared among multiple physicians treating the same patient. This situation would be improved if information from family physicians and patients' regular physicians was more systematically available to other physicians.

SUBMITTER: van Walraven C

PROVIDER: S-EPMC2572647 | biostudies-literature | 2008 Nov

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Information exchange among physicians caring for the same patient in the community.

van Walraven Carl C Taljaard Monica M Bell Chaim M CM Etchells Edward E Zarnke Kelly B KB Stiell Ian G IG Forster Alan J AJ

CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne 20081101 10

<h4>Background</h4>The exchange of information is an integral component of continuity of health care and may limit or prevent costly duplication of tests and treatments. This study determined the probability that patient information from previous visits with other physicians was available for a current physician visit.<h4>Methods</h4>We conducted a multicentre prospective cohort study including patients discharged from the medical or surgical services of 11 community and academic hospitals in On ...[more]

PMID: 18981442

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundBoth occupational physicians and orthopedic surgeons can be involved in the management of work relevant musculoskeletal disorders. These physicians hardly communicate with each other and this might lead to different advice to the patient. Therefore, we evaluated a standardized information exchange form for the exchange of relevant information between the orthopedic surgeon and the occupational physician. The main goals of this qualitative study are to evaluate whether the form improved information exchange, whether the form gave relevant information, and to generate ideas to further improve this information exchange.MethodsThe information exchange form was developed in two consensus meetings with five orthopedic surgeons and five occupational physicians. To evaluate the information exchange form, a qualitative evaluation was set up. Structured telephone interviews were undertaken with the patients, interviews with the physicians were face-to-face and semi-structured, based on a topic list. These interviews were recorded and literally transcribed. Each interview was analyzed separately in Atlas-Ti.ResultsThe form was used for 8 patients, 7 patients agreed to participate in the qualitative evaluation. All three orthopedic surgeons involved and three of the six involved occupational physicians agreed to be interviewed. The form was transferred to 4 occupational physicians, the other 3 patients recovered before they visited the occupational physician. The information on the form was regarded to be useful. All orthopedic surgeons agreed that the occupational physician should take the initiative. Most physicians felt that the form should not be filled out for each patient visiting an orthopedic surgeon, but only for those patients who do not recover as expected. Orthopedic surgeons suggested that a copy of the medical information provided to the general practitioner could also be provided to occupational physicians.ConclusionThe information exchange form was regarded to be useful and could be used in practice. The occupational physician should take the initiative for using this form and most physicians felt the information should only be exchanged for patients who do not recover as expected. That means that the advantage of giving information early in the treatment is lost.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Laboratory testing occupies a prominent place in health care. Information technology systems have the potential to empower laboratory experts and to enhance the interpretation of test results in order to better support physicians in their quest for better and safer patient care. This study sought to develop a better understanding of which laboratory information exchange (LIE) systems and features specialist physicians are using in hospital settings to consult their patients' laboratory test results, and what benefit they derive from such use. METHODS:As part of a broader research program on the use of health information exchange systems for laboratory medicine in Quebec, Canada, this study was designed as on online survey. Our sample is composed of 566 specialist physicians working in hospital settings, out of the 1512 physicians who responded to the survey (response rate of 17%). Respondents are representative of the targeted population of specialist physicians in terms of gender, age and hospital location. RESULTS:We first observed that 80% of the surveyed physicians used the province-wide interoperable electronic health records (iEHR) system and 93% used a laboratory results viewer (LRV) to consult laboratory test results and most (72%) use both systems to retrieve lab results. Next, our findings reveal important differences in the capabilities available in each type of system and in the use of these capabilities. Third, there are differences in the nature of the perceived benefits obtained from the use of each of these two systems. Last, the extent of use of an LRV is strongly influenced by the IT artefact itself (i.e., the hospital's LRV available capabilities) while the use of the provincial iEHR system is influenced by its organizational context (i.e. the hospital's size and location). CONCLUSIONS:The main contribution of this study lies in its insights into the role played by context in shaping physicians' choices about which laboratory information exchange systems to adopt and which features to use, and the different perceptions they have about benefits arising from such use. One related implication for practice is that success of LIE initiatives should not be solely assessed with basic usage statistics.

Project description:OBJECTIVE: To provide a case report of barriers and promoters to implementing a health information exchange (HIE) tool that supports patient transfers between hospitals and skilled nursing facilities. METHODS: A multi-disciplinary team conducted semi-structured telephone and in-person interviews in a purposive sample of HIE organizational informants and providers in New York City who implemented HIE to share patient transfer information. The researchers conducted grounded theory analysis to identify themes of barriers and promoters and took steps to improve the trustworthiness of the results including vetting from a knowledgeable study participant. RESULTS: Between May and October 2011, researchers recruited 18 participants: informaticians, healthcare administrators, software engineers, and providers from a skilled nursing facility. Subjects perceived the HIE tool's development a success in that it brought together stakeholders who had traditionally not partnered for informatics work, and that they could successfully share patient transfer information between a hospital and a skilled nursing facility. Perceived barriers included lack of hospital stakeholder buy-in and misalignment with clinical workflows that inhibited use of HIE-based patient transfer data. Participants described barriers and promoters in themes related to organizational, technical, and user-oriented issues. The investigation revealed that stakeholders could develop and implement health information technology that technically enables clinicians in both hospitals and skilled nursing facilities to exchange real-time information in support of patient transfers. User level barriers, particularly in the emergency department, should give pause to developers and implementers who plan to use HIE in support of patient transfers. CONCLUSIONS: Participants' experiences demonstrate how stakeholders may succeed in developing and piloting an electronic transfer form that relies on HIE to aggregate, communicate, and display relevant patient transfer data across health care organizations. Their experiences also provide insights for others seeking to develop HIE applications to improve patient transfers between emergency departments and skilled nursing facilities.

Project description:BackgroundThe privacy of patients with mental health conditions is prominent in health information exchange (HIE) discussions, given that their potentially sensitive personal health information (PHI) may be electronically shared for various health care purposes. Currently, the patient privacy perspective in the mental health context is not well understood because of the paucity of in-depth patient privacy research; however, the evidence suggests that patient privacy perspectives are more nuanced than what has been assumed in the academic and health care community.ObjectiveThis study aimed to generate an understanding on how patients with mental health conditions feel about privacy in the context of HIE in Canada. This study also sought to identify the factors underpinning their privacy perspectives and explored how their perspectives influenced their attitudes toward HIE.MethodsSemistructured interviews were conducted with patients at a Canadian academic hospital for addictions and mental health. Guided by the Antecedent-Privacy Concern-Outcome macro-model, interview transcripts underwent deductive and inductive thematic analyses.ResultsWe interviewed 14 participants. Their privacy concerns varied, depending on the participant's privacy experiences and health care perceptions. Media reports of privacy breaches and hackers had little impact on participants' privacy concerns because of a fatalistic belief that privacy breaches are a reality in the digital age. Rather, direct observations and experiences with the mistreatment of PHI in health care settings caused concern. Decisions to trust others with PHI depended on past experiences with the individual (or institution) and health care needs. Participants had little knowledge of patient privacy rights and legislation but were willing to participate in HIE because of perceived individual and societal benefits.ConclusionsThis study introduces evidence that patients with mental health conditions would support HIE. Participants were pragmatic, supporting HIE because they wanted the best care possible. They also understood that their PHI was critical in supporting the single-payer Canadian health care system. Participant health care experiences informed their privacy perspectives, trust, and PHI sharing attitudes-all accentuating the importance of the patient experience in building trust in HIE. Their lack of knowledge about patient rights and PHI uses highlights the degree of trust they have in the health care system to protect their privacy. These findings suggest that the patient privacy discourse should extend beyond the oft-cited barrier of patient privacy concerns to include discussions about building trust, communicating the benefits of HIE, and improving patient experiences. Although our findings are in the Canadian context, this study highlights the importance of engaging patients in privacy policy discussions, regardless of jurisdiction, to ensure their nuanced perspectives are reflected in policy decisions on their PHI.

Dataset Information

Information exchange among physicians caring for the same patient in the community.

Background

Methods

Results

Interpretation

Publications

Information exchange among physicians caring for the same patient in the community.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure