Skip to content

Showing Health Information Value in a Community Network

Showing Health Information Value in a Community Network

Status
Completed
Phases
NA
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT00365885
Enrollment
20108
Registered
2006-08-18
Start date
2006-08-31
Completion date
2008-08-31
Last updated
2014-07-11

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Clinical Decision Support, Medical Informatics Interventions, Population Health Management, Quality of Healthcare

Keywords

Medical Informatics, Decision Support Systems, Clinical, Community Health Services, Costs and Cost analysis

Brief summary

The purpose of this study is to determine the value of shared health information on care quality and costs when this information is used to notify care providers about concerning health events for patients cared for by a community-based network of providers.

Detailed description

Project Abstract This three-year project will assess the costs and benefits of health information technology (HIT) in an established community-wide network of academic, private and public healthcare facilities created to share clinical information for the purpose of population-based care management of over 16,000 Medicaid beneficiaries in Durham County, North Carolina. The area of interest for this project is the impact of information-driven interventions on care quality, patient safety and healthcare costs across the diverse stakeholders participating in this collaborative partnership. In order to asses HIT value rigorously in the context of a production information system that is under continual development, we propose to conduct a randomized controlled trial. Specifically, we will randomly assign patients by family unit to either a control group or to an intervention group in which they will initially receive one of 3 information-driven interventions. The interventions include clinical alerts sent to care providers, performance feedback reports presented to clinic managers, and care reminders sent directly to patients. The content of the interventions will address concerning events (e.g., an emergency room encounter for asthma) and care deficiencies (e.g., delinquency on biannual mammogram) identified from the composite set of clinical data in our information system. To assess the benefits and burdens of the interventions, combinations of the 3 interventions will be sequentially introduced into the study groups over the course of the project. The analysis will compare groups receiving various combinations of interventions as well as those receiving no interventions. At baseline and at six-month intervals throughout the course of the study, we will measure emergency department encounter rates, hospitalization rates, HEDIS (Healthcare Effectiveness Data and Information Set) scores, missed appointment rates, glycated hemoglobin levels in diabetics, and patient satisfaction. Our assessment will look at the societal value of HIT as well as the value for individual stakeholders including patients, providers, payers, purchasers and policy makers. From these measures, we will assess the costs and benefits of this community-wide effort to promote interoperability of clinical data exchange in order to increase the understanding of HIT value in a community setting. In our preliminary studies, we have observed a statistically significant 3-fold reduction in repeat ED (Emergency Department) encounter rates using email alerts alone. The approach used in this project is able to be generalized across geographic areas and healthcare settings and can, therefore, serve to promote the dissemination of HIT to other communities.

Interventions

OTHERComputer-based clinical decision support.

computer decision support system that generates notifications about sentinel health events and communicates this information via electronic mail to care managers, feedback reports to clinical managers, and letters to patients

Sponsors

Duke University
Lead SponsorOTHER

Study design

Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
FACTORIAL
Primary purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
SINGLE (Subject)

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
ALL
Healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

* Enrollment in the Community Care of North Carolina Medicaid program in Durham County North Carolina

Exclusion criteria

\-

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frame
Emergency department utilization rates and hospitalization ratesat 9 months after the intervention has been introduced and then at 6-month intervals as the intervention is sequentially enhanced.

Secondary

MeasureTime frame
ED encounter rates for asthmaat 9 months after the intervention has been introduced and then at 6-month intervals as the intervention is sequentially enhanced.
ED encounter rates for diabetesat 9 months after the intervention has been introduced and then at 6-month intervals as the intervention is sequentially enhanced.
Hospitalization ratesat 9 months after the intervention has been introduced and then at 6-month intervals as the intervention is sequentially enhanced.
Hospitalization rates for asthma (also PQI)at 9 months after the intervention has been introduced and then at 6-month intervals as the intervention is sequentially enhanced.
Hospitalization rates for diabetes (also PQI)at 9 months after the intervention has been introduced and then at 6-month intervals as the intervention is sequentially enhanced.
Glycemic control (hemoglobin A1c)at 9 months after the intervention has been introduced and then at 6-month intervals as the intervention is sequentially enhanced.
Medication contraindicationsat 9 months after the intervention has been introduced and then at 6-month intervals as the intervention is sequentially enhanced.
HEDIS - Preventive servicesat 9 months after the intervention has been introduced and then at 6-month intervals as the intervention is sequentially enhanced.
HEDIS - # WCC visitsat 9 months after the intervention has been introduced and then at 6-month intervals as the intervention is sequentially enhanced.
AHRQ Prevention Quality Indicatorsat 9 months after the intervention has been introduced and then at 6-month intervals as the intervention is sequentially enhanced.
HEDIS - Asthma and diabetesat 9 months after the intervention has been introduced and then at 6-month intervals as the intervention is sequentially enhanced.
# of messages triggered for health risksat 9 months after the intervention has been introduced and then at 6-month intervals as the intervention is sequentially enhanced.
# of messages triggered for barriers to careat 9 months after the intervention has been introduced and then at 6-month intervals as the intervention is sequentially enhanced.
Missed appointment ratesat 9 months after the intervention has been introduced and then at 6-month intervals as the intervention is sequentially enhanced.
ED encounter rates for low severity conditionsat 9 months after the intervention has been introduced and then at 6-month intervals as the intervention is sequentially enhanced.
F/U rates post-partumat 9 months after the intervention has been introduced and then at 6-month intervals as the intervention is sequentially enhanced.
Patient satisfaction instruments (CHAPS)at 6 to 9 months after the intervention has been introduced and then at 3 to 6-month intervals as the intervention is sequentially enhanced.
EuroQoLat 6 to 9 months after the intervention has been introduced and then at 3 to 6-month intervals as the intervention is sequentially enhanced.
Provider opinion surveysAt conclusion of study
Costs of ED utilization for all causesat 9 months after the intervention has been introduced and then at 6-month intervals as the intervention is sequentially enhanced.
Costs of ED use for asthmaat 9 months after the intervention has been introduced and then at 6-month intervals as the intervention is sequentially enhanced.
Costs of ED use for diabetesat 9 months after the intervention has been introduced and then at 6-month intervals as the intervention is sequentially enhanced.
Costs of ED use for low severity visitsat 9 months after the intervention has been introduced and then at 6-month intervals as the intervention is sequentially enhanced.
Hospitalization costs for all causesat 9 months after the intervention has been introduced and then at 6-month intervals as the intervention is sequentially enhanced.
Hospitalization costs for asthmaat 9 months after the intervention has been introduced and then at 6-month intervals as the intervention is sequentially enhanced.
Hospitalization costs for diabetesat 9 months after the intervention has been introduced and then at 6-month intervals as the intervention is sequentially enhanced.
Reimbursement for labs+other ancillary servicesat 9 months after the intervention has been introduced and then at 6-month intervals as the intervention is sequentially enhanced.
Primary care reimbursementat 9 months after the intervention has been introduced and then at 6-month intervals as the intervention is sequentially enhanced.
ED rates for recurrent ED encountersat 9 months after the intervention has been introduced and then at 6-month intervals as the intervention is sequentially enhanced.
Primary care appointment ratesat 9 months after the intervention has been introduced and then at 6-month intervals as the intervention is sequentially enhanced.

Countries

United States

Outcome results

None listed

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Feb 4, 2026