Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23594488›Full record

ArticleBMC medical informatics and decision making2013

The impact of EHR and HIE on reducing avoidable admissions: controlling main differential diagnoses.

Ofir Ben-Assuli, Itamar Shabtai, Moshe Leshno

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medical informatics and decision making, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 34 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
34citing papers in PubMed, 6 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

34 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. The role of information systems in emergency department decision-making-a literature review.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2024
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Ofir Ben-AssuliFaculty of Business Administration, Ono Academic College, Zahal Street, Kiryat Ono, IL, Israel. ofir.benassuli@gmail.com
Itamar Shabtai
Moshe Leshno

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMany medical organizations have invested heavily in electronic health record (EHR) and health information exchange (HIE) information systems (IS) to improve medical decision-making and increase efficiency. Despite the potential interoperability advantages of such IS, physicians do not always immediately consult electronic health information, and this decision may result in decreased level of quality of care as well as unnecessary costs. This study sought to reveal the effect of EHR IS use on the physicians' admission decisions. It was hypothesizing the using EHR IS will result in more accurate and informed admission decisions, which will manifest through reduction in single-day admissions and in readmissions within seven days.

methodsThis study used a track log-file analysis of a database containing 281,750 emergency department (ED) referrals in seven main hospitals in Israel. Log-files were generated by the system and provide an objective and unbiased measure of system usage, Thus allowing us to evaluate the contribution of an EHR IS, as well as an HIE network, to decision-makers (physicians). This is done by investigating whether EHR IS lead to improved medical outcomes in the EDs, which are known for their tight time constraints and overcrowding. The impact of EHR IS and HIE network was evaluated by comparing decisions on patients classified by five main differential diagnoses (DDs), made with or without viewing the patients' medical history via the EHR IS.

resultsThe results indicate a negative relationship between viewing medical history via EHR systems and the number of possibly redundant admissions. Among the DDs, we found information viewed most impactful for gastroenteritis, abdominal pain, and urinary tract infection in reducing readmissions within seven days, and for gastroenteritis, abdominal pain, and chest pain in reducing the single-day admissions' rate. Both indices are key quality measures in the health system. In addition, we found that interoperability (using external information provided online by health suppliers) contributed more to this reduction than local files, which are available only in the specific hospital. Thus, reducing the rate of redundant admissions by using external information produced larger odds ratios (of the β coefficients; e.g. viewing external information on patients resulted in negative associations of 27.2% regarding readmissions within seven days, and 13% for single-day admissions as compared with viewing local information on patients respectively).

conclusionsViewing medical history via an EHR IS and using HIE network led to a reduction in the number of seven day readmissions and single-day admissions for all patients. Using external medical history may imply a more thorough patient examination that can help eliminate unnecessary admissions. Nevertheless, in most instances physicians did not view medical history at all, probably due to the limited resources available, combined with the stress of rapid turnover in ED units.

Indexed as

AdultDelivery of Health Care, IntegratedDiagnosis, DifferentialElectronic Health RecordsFemaleHealth Maintenance OrganizationsHealth Services MisuseHospital Information SystemsHumansInternational Classification of DiseasesIsraelMaleMiddle AgedOutcome and Process Assessment, Health CarePatient AdmissionPatient Readmission

Identifiers

PMID23594488
PMCPMC3651728

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.