Nicholas D. Soulakis

Using Health Information Exchange to Improve Public Health

Public health relies on data reported by health care partners, and information technology makes such reporting easier than ever. However, data are often structured according to a variety of different terminologies and formats, making data interfaces complex and costly. As one strategy to address these challenges, health information organizations (HIOs) have been established to allow secure, integrated sharing of clinical information among numerous stakeholders, including clinical partners and public health, through health information exchange (HIE). We give detailed descriptions of 11 typical cases in which HIOs can be used for public health purposes. We believe that HIOs, and HIE in general, can improve the efficiency and quality of public health reporting, facilitate public health investigation, improve emergency response, and enable public health to communicate information to the clinical community.

Syndromic Surveillance Using Ambulatory Electronic Health Records

OBJECTIVE To assess the performance of electronic health record data for syndromic surveillance and to assess the feasibility of broadly distributed surveillance. DESIGN Two systems were developed to identify influenza-like illness and gastrointestinal infectious disease in ambulatory electronic health record data from a network of community health centers. The first system used queries on structured data and was designed for this specific electronic health record. The second used natural language processing of narrative data, but its queries were developed independently from this health record. Both were compared to influenza isolates and to a verified emergency department chief complaint surveillance system. MEASUREMENTS Lagged cross-correlation and graphs of the three time series. RESULTS For influenza-like illness, both the structured and narrative data correlated well with the influenza isolates and with the emergency department data, achieving cross-correlations of 0.89 (structured) and 0.84 (narrative) for isolates and 0.93 and 0.89 for emergency department data, and having similar peaks during influenza season. For gastrointestinal infectious disease, the structured data correlated fairly well with the emergency department data (0.81) with a similar peak, but the narrative data correlated less well (0.47). CONCLUSIONS It is feasible to use electronic health records for syndromic surveillance. The structured data performed best but required knowledge engineering to match the health record data to the queries. The narrative data illustrated the potential performance of a broadly disseminated system and achieved mixed results.

Visualizing collaborative electronic health record usage for hospitalized patients with heart failure

Objective To visualize and describe collaborative electronic health record (EHR) usage for hospitalized patients with heart failure. Materials and methods We identified records of patients with heart failure and all associated healthcare provider record usage through queries of the Northwestern Medicine Enterprise Data Warehouse. We constructed a network by equating access and updates of a patient’s EHR to a provider-patient interaction. We then considered shared patient record access as the basis for a second network that we termed the provider collaboration network. We calculated network statistics, the modularity of provider interactions, and provider cliques. Results We identified 548 patient records accessed by 5113 healthcare providers in 2012. The provider collaboration network had 1504 nodes and 83 998 edges. We identified 7 major provider collaboration modules. Average clique size was 87.9 providers. We used a graph database to demonstrate an ad hoc query of our provider-patient network. Discussion Our analysis suggests a large number of healthcare providers across a wide variety of professions access records of patients with heart failure during their hospital stay. This shared record access tends to take place not only in a pairwise manner but also among large groups of providers. Conclusion EHRs encode valuable interactions, implicitly or explicitly, between patients and providers. Network analysis provided strong evidence of multidisciplinary record access of patients with heart failure across teams of 100+ providers. Further investigation may lead to clearer understanding of how record access information can be used to strategically guide care coordination for patients hospitalized for heart failure.

Syndromic Surveillance during Pandemic (H1N1) 2009 Outbreak, New York, New York, USA

We compared emergency department and ambulatory care syndromic surveillance systems during the pandemic (H1N1) 2009 outbreak in New York City. Emergency departments likely experienced increases in influenza-like-illness significantly earlier than ambulatory care facilities because more patients sought care at emergency departments, differences in case definitions existed, or a combination thereof.

Characterizing Teamwork in Cardiovascular Care Outcomes: A Network Analytics Approach

Background—The nature of teamwork in healthcare is complex and interdisciplinary, and provider collaboration based on shared patient encounters is crucial to its success. Characterizing the intensity of working relationships with risk-adjusted patient outcomes supplies insight into provider interactions in a hospital environment. Methods and Results—We extracted 4 years of patient, provider, and activity data for encounters in an inpatient cardiology unit from Northwestern Medicine’s Enterprise Data Warehouse. We then created a provider–patient network to identify healthcare providers who jointly participated in patient encounters and calculated satisfaction rates for provider–provider pairs. We demonstrated the application of a novel parameter, the shared positive outcome ratio, a measure that assesses the strength of a patient-sharing relationship between 2 providers based on risk-adjusted encounter outcomes. We compared an observed collaboration network of 334 providers and 3453 relationships to 1000 networks with shared positive outcome ratio scores based on randomized outcomes and found 188 collaborative relationships between pairs of providers that showed significantly higher than expected patient satisfaction ratings. A group of 22 providers performed exceptionally in terms of patient satisfaction. Our results indicate high variability in collaboration scores across the network and highlight our ability to identify relationships with both higher and lower than expected scores across a set of shared patient encounters. Conclusions—Satisfaction rates seem to vary across different teams of providers. Team collaboration can be quantified using a composite measure of collaboration across provider pairs. Tracking provider pair outcomes over a sufficient set of shared encounters may inform quality improvement strategies such as optimizing team staffing, identifying characteristics and practices of high-performing teams, developing evidence-based team guidelines, and redesigning inpatient care processes.

An Outcome-Weighted Network Model for Characterizing Collaboration

Shared patient encounters form the basis of collaborative relationships, which are crucial to the success of complex and interdisciplinary teamwork in healthcare. Quantifying the strength of these relationships using shared risk-adjusted patient outcomes provides insight into interactions that occur between healthcare providers. We developed the Shared Positive Outcome Ratio (SPOR), a novel parameter that quantifies the concentration of positive outcomes between a pair of healthcare providers over a set of shared patient encounters. We constructed a collaboration network using hospital emergency department patient data from electronic health records (EHRs) over a three-year period. Based on an outcome indicating patient satisfaction, we used this network to assess pairwise collaboration and evaluate the SPOR. By comparing this network of 574 providers and 5,615 relationships to a set of networks based on randomized outcomes, we identified 295 (5.2%) pairwise collaborations having significantly higher patient satisfaction rates. Our results show extreme high- and low-scoring relationships over a set of shared patient encounters and quantify high variability in collaboration between providers. We identified 29 top performers in terms of patient satisfaction. Providers in the high-scoring group had both a greater average number of associated encounters and a higher percentage of total encounters with positive outcomes than those in the low-scoring group, implying that more experienced individuals may be able to collaborate more successfully. Our study shows that a healthcare collaboration network can be structurally evaluated to characterize the collaborative interactions that occur between healthcare providers in a hospital setting.

Leveraging electronic health record documentation for Failure Mode and Effects Analysis team identification

Objective: Using Failure Mode and Effects Analysis (FMEA) as an example quality improvement approach, our objective was to evaluate whether secondary use of orders, forms, and notes recorded by the electronic health record (EHR) during daily practice can enhance the accuracy of process maps used to guide improvement. We examined discrepancies between expected and observed activities and individuals involved in a high-risk process and devised diagnostic measures for understanding discrepancies that may be used to inform quality improvement planning. Methods: Inpatient cardiology unit staff developed a process map of discharge from the unit. We matched activities and providers identified on the process map to EHR data. Using four diagnostic measures, we analyzed discrepancies between expectation and observation. Results: EHR data showed that 35% of activities were completed by unexpected providers, including providers from 12 categories not identified as part of the discharge workflow. The EHR also revealed sub-components of process activities not identified on the process map. Additional information from the EHR was used to revise the process map and show differences between expectation and observation. Conclusion: Findings suggest EHR data may reveal gaps in process maps used for quality improvement and identify characteristics about workflow activities that can identify perspectives for inclusion in an FMEA. Organizations with access to EHR data may be able to leverage clinical documentation to enhance process maps used for quality improvement. While focused on FMEA protocols, findings from this study may be applicable to other quality activities that require process maps.

How Digital and Physical Care Team Interaction Affect Processing Times: A Case Study of Hospitalists

Importance: Hospitalist physicians face increasing pressure to maximize productivity while maintaining high quality of care. Their success, however, depends on the effective exchange of information among a patient’s care team. The latter comprises the digital team (caregivers who document in—not just access—the patient’s electronic health record) and a physical team (caregivers who directly communicate with the hospitalist).