Literature DB >> 23021932

Where should electronic records for patients be stored?

Vijay Lapsia1, Kenneth Lamb, William A Yasnoff.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: The importance of a nationwide health information infrastructure (NHII) is widely recognized. Patient data may be stored where it happens to be created (the distributed or institution-centric model) or in one place for a given patient (the centralized or patient-centric model). Minimal data is available regarding the performance implications of these alternative architectural choices.
OBJECTIVE: To help identify the architecture best suited for efficient and complete nationwide health information exchange based on the large-scale operational characteristics of these architectures.
DESIGN: We used simulation to study the impact of health care record (data) fragmentation and probability of encounter on transaction volume and data retrieval failure rate as markers of performance for each of the above architectures.
RESULTS: Data fragmentation and the probability of encounter directly correlate with transaction volume and are significantly higher for the distributed model when the number of data nodes >4 (p<0.0001). The number of data retrieval failures increases in proportion to fragmentation and is significantly higher for the distributed model when the number of data nodes ≥2 (p<0.0059).
CONCLUSION: In simulation studies, the distributed model scaled poorly in terms of data availability and integrity with a higher failure rate when compared to the centralized model of data storage. Choice of architecture may have implications on the efficiency, usability, and effectiveness of the NHII at the point of care.
Copyright © 2012 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 23021932     DOI: 10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2012.08.008

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Med Inform        ISSN: 1386-5056            Impact factor:   4.046


  7 in total

Review 1.  What do we know about developing patient portals? a systematic literature review.

Authors:  Terese Otte-Trojel; Antoinette de Bont; Thomas G Rundall; Joris van de Klundert
Journal:  J Am Med Inform Assoc       Date:  2015-09-02       Impact factor: 4.497

2.  Overview of recent trans-institutional health network projects in Japan and Germany.

Authors:  Maren Juhr; Reinhold Haux; Takahiro Suzuki; Katsuhiko Takabayashi
Journal:  J Med Syst       Date:  2015-03-03       Impact factor: 4.460

3.  Adoption of a Nationwide Shared Medical Record in France: Lessons Learnt after 5 Years of Deployment.

Authors:  Brigitte Séroussi; Jacques Bouaud
Journal:  AMIA Annu Symp Proc       Date:  2017-02-10

4.  Putting health IT on the path to success.

Authors:  William A Yasnoff; Latanya Sweeney; Edward H Shortliffe
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2013-03-13       Impact factor: 56.272

5.  CADe system integrated within the electronic health record.

Authors:  Noelia Vállez; Gloria Bueno; Óscar Déniz; María del Milagro Fernández; Carlos Pastor; Miguel Ángel Rienda; Pablo Esteve; María Arias
Journal:  Biomed Res Int       Date:  2013-09-17       Impact factor: 3.411

6.  Learning from health information exchange technical architecture and implementation in seven beacon communities.

Authors:  Douglas B McCarthy; Karen Propp; Alexander Cohen; Raj Sabharwal; Abigail A Schachter; Alison L Rein
Journal:  EGEMS (Wash DC)       Date:  2014-05-05

7.  The HealthChain Blockchain for Electronic Health Records: Development Study.

Authors:  Yonggang Xiao; Bin Xu; Wenhao Jiang; Yunjun Wu
Journal:  J Med Internet Res       Date:  2021-01-22       Impact factor: 5.428

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.