Comparative effectiveness research (CER): a summary of AHRQ's CER on therapies for rheumatoid arthritis.
(49/82)
BACKGROUND: In recent years, the U.S. government has designated funding of several large-scale initiatives for comparative effectiveness research (CER) in health care. The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) of 2009 apportioned more than $1 billion to support CER programs administered by the Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS), the National Institutes of Health (NIH), and the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ). CER is generally defined as the undertaking of original research or systematic reviews of published literature in order to compare the benefits and risks of different approaches to preventing, diagnosing, or treating diseases. These approaches may include diagnostic tests, medications, medical devices, and surgeries. The overall goals of CER are to support informed health care decisions by patients, clinicians, payers, and policy makers and to apply its evidence to ultimately improve the quality, effectiveness, and efficiency of health care. OBJECTIVES: To (a) provide managed care professionals with general definitions of CER, specifically as it is administered by AHRQ; (b) discuss the importance of CER to clinical and managed care pharmacists; and (c) summarize key methods and findings from AHRQ's 2007 comparative effectiveness review on therapies for rheumatoid arthritis (RA). SUMMARY: As supported by AHRQ, CER is conducted in order to synthesize comprehensive evidence on the comparative benefits and harms of treatment interventions. The findings from comparative effectiveness reviews can thus contribute to informing therapeutic strategies and treatment decisions. In 2007, a multitude of RA treatment options and studies motivated AHRQ to commission a systematic comparative effectiveness review. Conducted by investigators at the RTI-University of North Carolina Evidence-Based Practice Center, the review included comparisons of synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs), biologic agents, synthetic DMARDs versus biologic agents, and various combination therapies. Head-to-head comparisons of synthetic DMARDs generally revealed no significant differences in long-term clinical and radiographic outcomes, or in functional capacity or health-related quality of life. Two nonrandomized prospective cohort studies and 1 open-label effectiveness trial reported no differences in ACR20 and ACR50 response rates in patients treated with the tissue necrosis factor (TNF)-alpha inhibitors etanercept and infliximab. Comparisons of TNF-alpha inhibitors generally indicated no significant differences in rates of adverse events, including serious infections, and no increases in rates over time. In comparisons of a biologic agent combined with methotrexate versus a biologic agent alone, combination therapies were generally associated with better clinical response rates and better outcomes of functional capacity and quality of life. The most common adverse events observed in studies on biologic agents were diarrhea, headache, nausea, rhinitis, injection site reactions, and upper respiratory tract infections. (+info)
Health information exchange among US hospitals.
(50/82)
OBJECTIVES: To determine the proportion of US hospitals engaged in health information exchange (HIE) with unaffiliated providers and to identify key hospital-level and market-level factors associated with participating in exchange. STUDY DESIGN: Using the 2009 American Hospital Association Information Technology survey, supplemented by Dartmouth Atlas, Area Resource File, and other national data, we examined which hospitals participated in regional efforts to electronically exchange clinical data. METHODS: We used logistic regression models to determine hospital-level characteristics and market-level characteristics associated with hospitals' likelihood of participating in HIE. RESULTS: We found that 10.7% of US hospitals engaged in HIE with unaffiliated providers. In communities where exchange occurred, for-profit hospitals and those with a small market share were far less likely to engage in HIE than nonprofit hospitals or those with a larger market share. Hospitals in more concentrated markets were more likely to exchange and hospitals in markets with higher Medicare spending were less likely to exchange. CONCLUSIONS: At the start of implementation of the Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health (HITECH) Act, only a small minority of US hospitals electronically exchange clinical data with unaffiliated providers. Health information exchange is a key part of reforming the healthcare system, and factors related to competitiveness may be holding some providers back. (+info)
Permanent certification program for health information technology; revisions to ONC-Approved Accreditor processes. Final rule.
(51/82)
Under the authority granted to the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology by section 3001(c)(5) of the Public Health Service Act (PHSA) as added by the Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health (HITECH) Act, this final rule establishes a process for addressing instances where the ONC-Approved Accreditor (ONC-AA) engages in improper conduct or does not perform its responsibilities under the permanent certification program. This rule also addresses the status of ONC-Authorized Certification Bodies (ONC-ACBs) in instances where there may be a change in the accreditation organization serving as the ONC-AA and clarifies the responsibilities of the new ONC-AA. (+info)
The Department of Veterans Affairs, Department of Defense, and Kaiser Permanente Nationwide Health Information Network exchange in San Diego: patient selection, consent, and identity matching.
(52/82)
The Nationwide Health Information Network allow for the secure exchange of Electronic Health Records over the Internet. The Department of Veterans Affairs, Department of Defense, and Kaiser Permanente, participated in an implementation of the NwHIN specifications in San Diego, California. This paper focuses primarily on patient involvement. Specifically, it describes how the shared patients were identified, were invited to participate and to provide consent for disclosing parts of their medical record, and were matched across organizations. A total 1,144 were identified as shared patients. Invitation letters containing consent forms were mailed and resulted in 42% participation. Invalid consent forms were a significant issue (25%). Initially, the identity matching algorithms yielded low success rate (5%). However, elimination of certain traits and abbreviations and probabilistic algorithms have significantly increased matching rate. Access to information from external sources better informs providers, improves decisions and efficiency, and helps meet the meaningful use criteria. (+info)
Progress and challenge in meeting meaningful use at an integrated delivery network.
(53/82)
Intermountain Healthcare hospitals and providers are eligible for approximately $95 million in incentives from the Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health Act (HITECH), which requires that hospitals and providers use a certified electronic health record (EHR) in a meaningful way. This paper describes the our progress in readying legacy systems for certification, including measuring, and filling gaps in (EHR) functionality. Also addressed are some of the challenges and successes in meeting meaningful use. Methods for measuring and tracking levels of clinician meaningful use behaviors, and our most recent results impacting meaningful use behaviors in a large integrated delivery network are described. We identified 20 EHR requirements we can certify now, 16 requirements with minor issues to resolve, and 38 requirements which are still in some state of development. We also identified 6 meaningful use workflows that will require significant work to bring all of our hospitals and providers above the measure requirement. (+info)
From simply inaccurate to complex and inaccurate: complexity in standards-based quality measures.
(54/82)
Quality measurement has been slow to make a major impact in health care. Initial measures were too simple to affect outcomes of importance. Incentive programs such as Meaningful Use encourage better measures, but in process may become more complex. We evaluated the measures selected for Meaningful Use in two ways: we counted unique concept identifiers, taxonomies, and aggregated concepts as measures of complexity; and we surveyed informatics professionals to assess difficulty. There were 20,316 unique concept identifiers, 35 taxonomies, and 317 aggregated concepts across the 45 measures. Half the respondents reported measures at least moderately difficult. The number of identifiers was associated with fewer implementations (r=-.37); rating-of-difficulty was associated with more taxonomies (r=.24). The impact on accuracy may be substantial when moving to measures intended to be more relevant to clinical outcomes but requiring the use of more taxonomies, unused structured concept identifiers, or concepts only in free text fields. (+info)
Using a unified usability framework to dramatically improve the usability of an EMR Module.
(55/82)
Electronic Medical Records (EMRs) are increasingly used in modern health care. As a result, systematically applying usability principles becomes increasingly vital in creating systems that provide health care professionals with satisfying, efficient, and effective user experiences, as opposed to frustrating interfaces that are difficult to learn, hard to use, and error prone. This study demonstrates how the TURF framework [1] can be used to evaluate the usability of an EMR module and subsequently redesign its interface with dramatically improved usability in a unified, systematic, and principled way. This study also shows how heuristic evaluations can be utilized to complement the TURF framework. (+info)
Health information exchange, Health Information Technology use, and hospital readmission rates.
(56/82)
The Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health (HITECH) Act of 2009 offers significant financial incentives to hospitals that can demonstrate "meaningful use" of EHRs. Reduced hospital readmissions are an expected outcome of improved care coordination. Increased use of HIT, and in particular participation in HIE are touted as ways to improve coordination of care. In a 2007 national sample of US hospitals, we evaluated the association between hospitals' HIE and HIT use and 30-day risk adjusted readmission rates for acute myocardial infarction (AMI), heart failure, and pneumonia. We found that hospital participation in HIE was not associated with lower hospital readmission rates; however, high levels of electronic documentation (an aspect of HIT use) were associated with modest reductions in readmission for heart failure (24.6% vs. 24.1%, P=.02) and pneumonia (18.4% vs. 17.9%, P=.003). More detailed data on participation in HIE are necessary to conduct more robust assessment of the relationship between HIE and hospital readmission rates. (+info)