BACKGROUND: Arizona Medicaid developed a Health Information Exchange (HIE) system called the Arizona Medical Information Exchange (AMIE). OBJECTIVE: To evaluate physicians' perceptions regarding AMIE's impact on health outcomes and healthcare costs. MEASUREMENTS: A focus-group guide was developed and included five domains: perceived impact of AMIE on (1) quality of care; (2) workflow and efficiency; (3) healthcare costs; (4) system usability; and (5) AMIE data content. Qualitative data were analyzed using analytical coding. RESULTS: A total of 29 clinicians participated in the study. The attendance rate was 66% (N=19) for the first and last month of focus-group meetings and 52% (N=15) for the focus group meetings conducted during the second month. The benefits most frequently mentioned during the focus groups included: (1) identification of "doctor shopping"; (2) averting duplicative testing; and (3) increased efficiency of clinical information gathering. The most frequent disadvantage mentioned was the limited availability of data in the AMIE system. CONCLUSION: Respondents reported that AMIE had the potential to improve care, but they felt that AMIE impact was limited due to the data available.
BACKGROUND: Arizona Medicaid developed a Health Information Exchange (HIE) system called the Arizona Medical Information Exchange (AMIE). OBJECTIVE: To evaluate physicians' perceptions regarding AMIE's impact on health outcomes and healthcare costs. MEASUREMENTS: A focus-group guide was developed and included five domains: perceived impact of AMIE on (1) quality of care; (2) workflow and efficiency; (3) healthcare costs; (4) system usability; and (5) AMIE data content. Qualitative data were analyzed using analytical coding. RESULTS: A total of 29 clinicians participated in the study. The attendance rate was 66% (N=19) for the first and last month of focus-group meetings and 52% (N=15) for the focus group meetings conducted during the second month. The benefits most frequently mentioned during the focus groups included: (1) identification of "doctor shopping"; (2) averting duplicative testing; and (3) increased efficiency of clinical information gathering. The most frequent disadvantage mentioned was the limited availability of data in the AMIE system. CONCLUSION: Respondents reported that AMIE had the potential to improve care, but they felt that AMIE impact was limited due to the data available.
Authors: Jan Walker; Eric Pan; Douglas Johnston; Julia Adler-Milstein; David W Bates; Blackford Middleton Journal: Health Aff (Millwood) Date: 2005 Jan-Jun Impact factor: 6.301
Authors: John Halamka; Meg Aranow; Carl Ascenzo; David Bates; Greg Debor; John Glaser; Allan Goroll; Jim Stowe; Micky Tripathi; Gordon Vineyard Journal: J Am Med Inform Assoc Date: 2005-07-27 Impact factor: 4.497
Authors: Peter C Smith; Rodrigo Araya-Guerra; Caroline Bublitz; Bennett Parnes; L Miriam Dickinson; Rebecca Van Vorst; John M Westfall; Wilson D Pace Journal: JAMA Date: 2005-02-02 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Niam Yaraghi; Anna Ye Du; Raj Sharman; Ram D Gopal; R Ramesh; Ranjit Singh; Gurdev Singh Journal: J Am Med Inform Assoc Date: 2013-11-28 Impact factor: 4.497
Authors: Robert S Rudin; Eric C Schneider; Lynn A Volk; Peter Szolovits; Claudia A Salzberg; Steven R Simon; David W Bates Journal: Health Aff (Millwood) Date: 2012-03 Impact factor: 6.301
Authors: Karen B Eden; Annette M Totten; Steven Z Kassakian; Paul N Gorman; Marian S McDonagh; Beth Devine; Miranda Pappas; Monica Daeges; Susan Woods; William R Hersh Journal: Int J Med Inform Date: 2016-01-24 Impact factor: 4.046
Authors: Philippa Nelson; Anthony J Bell; Larry Nathanson; Leon D Sanchez; Jonathan Fisher; Philip D Anderson Journal: Intern Emerg Med Date: 2016-11-10 Impact factor: 3.397