A Nationwide Network of Health AI Assurance Laboratories.

Importance: Given the importance of rigorous development and evaluation standards needed of artificial intelligence (AI) models used in health care, nationwide accepted procedures to provide assurance that the use of AI is fair, appropriate, valid, effective, and safe are urgently needed. Observations: While there are several efforts to develop standards and best practices to evaluate AI, there is a gap between having such guidance and the application of such guidance to both existing and new AI models being developed. As of now, there is no publicly available, nationwide mechanism that enables objective evaluation and ongoing assessment of the consequences of using health AI models in clinical care settings. Conclusion and Relevance: The need to create a public-private partnership to support a nationwide health AI assurance labs network is outlined here. In this network, community best practices could be applied for testing health AI models to produce reports on their performance that can be widely shared for managing the lifecycle of AI models over time and across populations and sites where these models are deployed.

Physician satisfaction following electronic health record adoption in three massachusetts communities.

BACKGROUND: Despite mandates and incentives for electronic health record (EHR) adoption, little is known about factors predicting physicians' satisfaction following EHR implementation. OBJECTIVE: To measure predictors of physician satisfaction following EHR adoption. METHODS: A total of 163 physicians completed a mailed survey before and after EHR implementation through a statewide pilot project in Massachusetts. Multivariable logistic regression identified predictors of physician satisfaction with their current practice situation in 2009 and generalized estimating equations accounted for clustering. RESULTS: The response rate was 77% in 2005 and 68% in 2009. In 2005, prior to EHR adoption, 28% of physicians were very satisfied with their current practice situation compared to 25% in 2009, following EHR adoption (P < .001). In multivariate analysis, physician satisfaction following EHR adoption was correlated with self-reported ease of EHR implementation (adjusted odds ratio [OR] = 5.7, 95% CI 2.1 - 16), resources for practice improvement (adjusted OR = 2.6, 95% CI 1.2 - 6.1), pre-intervention satisfaction (adjusted OR = 4.8, 95% CI 1.5 - 15), and stress (adjusted OR = 5.3, 95% CI 1.1 - 25). Male physicians reported lower satisfaction following EHR adoption (adjusted OR = 0.3, 95% CI 0.2 - 0.6). CONCLUSIONS: Interventions to expand EHR use should consider additional support for practices with fewer resources for improvement and ensure ease of EHR implementation. EHR adoption may be a factor in alleviating physicians' stress. Addressing physicians' satisfaction prior to practice transformation and anticipating greater dissatisfaction among male physicians will be essential to retaining the physician workforce and ensuring the quality of care they deliver.

Imminent adopters of electronic health records in ambulatory care.

BACKGROUND: Although evidence suggests electronic health records (EHRs) can improve quality and efficiency, provider adoption rates in the US ambulatory setting are relatively low. Prior studies have identified factors correlated with EHR use, but less is known about characteristics of physicians on the verge of adoption. OBJECTIVE: To compare characteristics of physicians who are imminent adopters of EHRs with EHR users and non-users. DESIGN AND PARTICIPANTS: A survey was mailed (June - November 2005) to a stratified random sample of all medical practices in Massachusetts. One physician from each practice (n=1884) was randomly selected to participate. Overall, 1345 physicians (71.4%) responded to the survey, with 1082 eligible for analysis due to exclusion criteria. 'Imminent adopters' were those planning to adopt EHRs within 12 months. MEASUREMENTS: We assessed physician and practice characteristics, availability of technology, barriers to adoption or expansion of health information technology (HIT), computer proficiency, and financial considerations. RESULTS: Compared to non-users, imminent adopters were younger, more experienced with technology, and more often in practices engaged in quality improvement. More imminent adopters owned or partly owned their practices (57.4%) than users (33.5%; p<0.001), but fewer imminent adopters owned their practices than non-users (65.7%; p<0.001). Additionally, more imminent adopters (26.0%) reported personal financial incentives for HIT use than users (14.8%; p<0.001) and non-users (10.8%; p<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Imminent adopters of EHRs differed from users and non-users. Financial considerations appear to play a major role in adoption decisions. Knowledge of these differences may assist policy-makers and healthcare leaders as they work to increase EHR adoption rates.

Understanding the decisions and values of stakeholders in health information exchanges: experiences from Massachusetts.

OBJECTIVES: We studied how health information exchange systems are established by examining the decisions (and thus, indirectly, the values) of key stakeholders (health care providers) participating in a health information exchange pilot project in 3 Massachusetts communities. Our aim was to understand how these kinds of information exchanges can be made viable. METHODS: We used semistructured interviews to assess health care providers' decision-making processes in selecting technical architectures and vendors for the pilot projects to uncover their needs, expectations, and motivations. RESULTS: Our interviews indicated that, after extensive evaluations, health care providers in all 3 communities eventually selected a hybrid architecture that included a central data repository. However, the reasons for selecting this architecture varied considerably among the 3 communities, reflecting their particular values. Plans to create a community patient portal also differed across communities. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that, to become established, health information exchange efforts must foster trust, appeal to strategic interests of the medical community as a whole, and meet stakeholder expectations of benefits from quality measurements and population health interventions. If health information exchange organizations cannot address these factors, sustainability will remain precarious.

A tale of two large community electronic health record extension projects.

The Massachusetts eHealth Collaborative and the New York City Primary Care Information Project have provided financial subsidies and extensive support to help hundreds of independent medical practices successfully adopt electronic health records. Their efforts address overcoming key barriers such as the amount of start-up funds needed, productivity lost during implementation, and the difficulty of choosing the right system. Their approaches differ: the Massachusetts project emphasizes continuity of care within selected communities; New York emphasizes improvements in preventive care and chronic disease management across a population. Both, however, offer valuable insights that can be applied elsewhere.

Engaging patients for health information exchange.

Health information exchange (HIE) offers tremendous potential for the future, but its widespread adoption and sustainability depend upon engaging patients and earning their trust. Patients' willingness to allow their data to be shared will drive the usefulness of HIE and therefore the sustainability of regional health information organizations (RHIOs). The Massachusetts eHealth Collaborative (MAeHC) is one of a few organizations that have developed a successful community-based collaborative model, with more than a 90 percent opt-in rate among patients to participate in widespread electronic data sharing. Lessons learned from MAeHC's three pilot programs could be instructive for other HIE projects around the country.

Community-wide implementation of health information technology: the Massachusetts eHealth Collaborative experience.

The Massachusetts eHealth Collaborative (MAeHC) was formed to improve patient safety and quality of care by promoting the use of health information technology through community-based implementation of electronic health records (EHRs) and health information exchange. The Collaborative has recently implemented EHRs in a diverse set of competitively selected communities, encompassing nearly 500 physicians serving over 500,000 patients. Targeting both EHR implementation and health information exchange at the community level has identified numerous challenges and strategies for overcoming them. This article describes the formation and implementation phases of the Collaborative, focusing on barriers identified, lessons learned, and policy issues.

Readiness for electronic health records: comparison of characteristics of practices in a collaborative with the remainder of Massachusetts.

OBJECTIVE: The Massachusetts e-Health Collaborative (MAeHC) is implementing electronic health records (EHRs) in physicians' offices throughout three diverse communities. This study's objective was to assess the degree to which these practices are representative of physicians' practices statewide. DESIGN: We surveyed all MAeHC physicians (n=464) and compared their responses to those of a contemporaneously surveyed statewide random sample (n=1884). MEASUREMENTS: The survey questionnaire assessed practice characteristics related to EHR adoption, prevailing office culture related to quality and safety, attitudes toward health information technology (HIT) and perceptions of medical practice. RESULTS: A total of 355 MAeHC physicians (77%) and 1345 physicians from the statewide sample (71%) completed the survey. MAeHC practices resembled practices throughout Massachusetts in terms of practice size, physician age and gender, prevailing financial incentives for quality performance and HIT adoption and available resources for practice expansion. MAeHC practices were more likely to be located in rural areas (9.5% vs 4.4%, P=0.004). Physicians in both samples responded similarly to six of seven self-assessments of the office practice environment for quality and safety. Internet connections were more prevalent among MAeHC practices than across the state (96% vs 83%, P<0.001), but similar proportions of MAeHC physicians (83%) and statewide physicians (86%) used the internet daily (P=0.19). CONCLUSION: MAeHC is implementing EHRs and health information exchange among communities with physicians and practices that appear generally representative of Massachusetts. The lessons learned from this pilot project should be applicable statewide and to other states with large numbers of physicians in small office practices.

E-Prescribing collaboration in Massachusetts: early experiences from regional prescribing projects.

Massachusetts payers and providers have encouraged clinician usage of e-Prescribing technology to improve patient safety, enhance office practice efficiencies, and reduce medical costs. This report describes three early pilot e-Prescribing projects as case studies. These projects identified the e-Prescribing needs of clinicians, illustrated key issues that made implementation difficult, and clarified the impact of various types of functionality. The authors identified ten key barriers: (1) previous negative technology experiences, (2) initial and long-term cost, (3) lost productivity, (4) competing priorities, (5) change management issues, (6) interoperability limitations, (7) information technology (IT) requirements, (8) standards limitations, (9) waiting for an "all-in-one solution," and (10) confusion about competing product offerings including hospital/Integrated Delivery System (IDN)-sponsored projects. In Massachusetts, regional projects have helped to address these barriers, and e-Prescribing activities are accelerating rapidly within the state.

Health care IT collaboration in Massachusetts: the experience of creating regional connectivity.

The state of Massachusetts has significant early experience in planning for and implementing interoperability networks for exchange of clinical and financial data. Members of our evolving data-sharing organizations gained valuable experience that is of potential benefit to others regarding the governance, policies, and technologies underpinning regional health information organizations. We describe the history, roles, and evolution of organizations and their plans for and success with pilot projects.