Comparison of Electronic Health Record System Functionalities to support the patient recruitment process in clinical trials |
| |
| Affiliation: | 1. Center for Information Technology and Medical Engineering, Heidelberg University Hospital, Speyerer Straße 4, 69115 Heidelberg, Germany;2. Institute of Medical Informatics, University of Münster, Albert-Schweitzer-Campus 1, A11, 48149 Münster, Germany;3. Chair of Medical Informatics, Friedrich-Alexander-University Erlangen-Nuremberg, Krankenhausstraße 12, 91054 Erlangen, Germany;4. Department of Information- and Communication-Technology, Düsseldorf University Hospital, Moorenstraße 5, 40225 Düsseldorf, Germany;5. Department of Medical Informatics in Anesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine, Justus-Liebig University Gießen, Rudolf-Buchheimstraße 7, 35385 Gießen, Germany;6. Coordination Centre for Clinical Trials, Faculty of Medicine, Heinrich Heine University Düsseldorf, Moorenstraße 5, 40225 Düsseldorf, Germany;1. Department of Biomedical Informatics, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, United States;2. Geriatric Pharmaceutical Outcomes and Geroinformatics Research & Training Program, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, United States;3. Division of Geriatric Medicine, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, United States;4. Intelligent Systems Program, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, United States;5. Medical Radiation Sciences, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia;1. Division of Emergency Medicine, Cincinnati Children''s, United States;2. Division of Biomedical Informatics, Cincinnati Children''s, United States;3. Department of Pediatrics, University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences, United States;4. Department of Emergency Medicine, Vanderbilt University, United States;5. Center for Asthma Research and Environmental Health, Vanderbilt University, United States;6. Department of Biomedical Informatics, Vanderbilt University, United States;7. Department of Biostatistics, Vanderbilt University, United States;1. The H. John Heinz III College, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA, USA;2. Aflac Center for Cancer and Blood Disorders, Children''s Healthcare of Atlanta, Atlanta, GA, USA;3. Department of Statistics, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA, USA;1. National Institute for Health Innovation (NIHI), The University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand;2. Ocean Informatics Pty. Ltd., Brisbane, Australia;3. Department of Computer Science, The University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand;1. Coordination Centre for Clinical Trials, Heinrich-Heine-University, Düsseldorf, Germany;2. NIVEL, Utrecht, The Netherlands;3. MedLawConsult, Den Haag, The Netherlands;4. University of Warwick, Coventry, UK;5. NIHR Biomedical Research Centre at Guy''s and St. Thomas’ NHS Foundation Trust and King''s College London, London, UK |
| |
| Abstract: | ObjectivesReusing data from electronic health records for clinical and translational research and especially for patient recruitment has been tackled in a broader manner since about a decade. Most projects found in the literature however focus on standalone systems and proprietary implementations at one particular institution often for only one singular trial and no generic evaluation of EHR systems for their applicability to support the patient recruitment process does yet exist. Thus we sought to assess whether the current generation of EHR systems in Germany provides modules/tools, which can readily be applied for IT-supported patient recruitment scenarios.MethodsWe first analysed the EHR portfolio implemented at German University Hospitals and then selected 5 sites with five different EHR implementations covering all major commercial systems applied in German University Hospitals. Further, major functionalities required for patient recruitment support have been defined and the five sample EHRs and their standard tools have been compared to the major functionalities.ResultsIn our analysis of the site's hospital information system environments (with four commercial EHR systems and one self-developed system) we found that – even though no dedicated module for patient recruitment has been provided – most EHR products comprise generic tools such as workflow engines, querying capabilities, report generators and direct SQL-based database access which can be applied as query modules, screening lists and notification components for patient recruitment support. A major limitation of all current EHR products however is that they provide no dedicated data structures and functionalities for implementing and maintaining a local trial registry.ConclusionsAt the five sites with standard EHR tools the typical functionalities of the patient recruitment process could be mostly implemented. However, no EHR component is yet directly dedicated to support research requirements such as patient recruitment. We recommend for future developments that EHR customers and vendors focus much more on the provision of dedicated patient recruitment modules. |
| |
| Keywords: | Patient selection Electronic health records Hospital information systems Clinical trials |
| 本文献已被 ScienceDirect 等数据库收录！ |
|
