Journal of General Internal Medicine

, Volume 28, Issue 2, pp 176–183

Does Health Information Exchange Reduce Unnecessary Neuroimaging and Improve Quality of Headache Care in the Emergency Department?

  • James E. Bailey
  • Jim Y. Wan
  • Lisa M. Mabry
  • Stephen H. Landy
  • Rebecca A. Pope
  • Teresa M. Waters
  • Mark E. Frisse
Original Research

Abstract

Background

Health information exchange (HIE) is advocated as an approach to reduce unnecessary testing and improve quality of emergency department (ED) care, but little evidence supports its use. Headache is a specific condition for which HIE has theoretical benefits.

Objective

To determine whether health information exchange (HIE) reduces potentially unnecessary neuroimaging, increases adherence with evidence-based guidelines, and decreases costs in the emergency department (ED) evaluation of headache.

Design

Longitudinal data analysis

Subjects

All repeat patient-visits (N = 2,102) by all 1,252 adults presenting with headache to a Memphis metropolitan area ED two or more times between August 1, 2007 and July 31, 2009.

Intervention

Use of a regional HIE connecting the 15 major adult hospitals and two regional clinic systems by authorized ED personnel to access the patient’s record during the time period in which the patient was being seen in the ED.

Main Measures

Diagnostic neuroimaging (CT, CT angiography, MRI or MRI angiography), evidence-based guideline adherence, and total patient-visit estimated cost.

Key Results

HIE data were accessed for 21.8 % of ED patient-visits for headache. 69.8 % received neuroimaging. HIE was associated with decreased odds of diagnostic neuroimaging (odds ratio [OR] 0.38, confidence interval [CI] 0.29–0.50) and increased adherence with evidence-based guidelines (OR 1.33, CI 1.02–1.73). Administrative/nursing staff HIE use (OR 0.24, CI 0.17–0.34) was also associated with decreased neuroimaging after adjustment for confounding factors. Overall HIE use was not associated with significant changes in costs.

Conclusions

HIE is associated with decreased diagnostic imaging and increased evidence-based guideline adherence in the emergency evaluation of headache, but was not associated with improvements in overall costs. Controlled trials are needed to test whether specific HIE enhancements to increase HIE use can further reduce potentially unnecessary diagnostic imaging and improve adherence with guidelines while decreasing costs of care.

KEY WORDS

health information exchange medical informatics headache headache disorders migraine disorders delivery of health care emergency medicine quality of health care health services research 

References

  1. 1.
    Overhage JM, Evans L, Marchibroda J. Communities' readiness for health information exchange: the national landscape in 2004. J Am Med Inform Assoc: JAMIA. 2005;12:107–12.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    American College of Emergency Physicians. Health information technology. Ann Emerg Med. 2008;52:595.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Walker J, Pan E, Johnston D, Adler-Milstein J, Bates DW, Middleton B. The value of health care information exchange and interoperability. Health Aff (Millwood). 2005;Suppl Web Exclusives:W5-10-W5-8.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Overhage JM, Dexter PR, Perkins SM, et al. A randomized, controlled trial of clinical information shared from another institution. Ann Emerg Med. 2002;39:14–23.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Frisse ME, Johnson KB, Nian H, et al. The financial impact of health information exchange on emergency department care. J Am Med Inform Assoc: JAMIA. 2011.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Johnson KB, Unertl KM, Chen Q, et al. Health information exchange usage in emergency departments and clinics: the who, what, and why. J Am Med Inform Assoc: JAMIA. 2011;18:690–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Lucado J, Paez K, Elixhauser A. Headaches in U.S. hospitals and emergency departments, 2008. In: Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project (HCUP) Statistical Brief. May 2011 ed. Rockville, MD: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality; 2011.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Goldstein JN, Camargo CA Jr, Pelletier AJ, Edlow JA. Headache in United States emergency departments: demographics, work-up and frequency of pathological diagnoses. Cephalalgia. 2006;26:684–90.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Rasmussen BK, Jensen R, Schroll M, Olesen J. Epidemiology of headache in a general population–a prevalence study. J Clin Epidemiol. 1991;44:1147–57.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Newman LC, Lipton RB. Emergency department evaluation of headache. Neurol Clin. 1998;16:285–303.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Detsky ME, McDonald DR, Baerlocher MO, Tomlinson GA, McCrory DC, Booth CM. Does this patient with headache have a migraine or need neuroimaging? JAMA. 2006;296:1274–83.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Ward TN, Levin M, Phillips JM. Evaluation and management of headache in the emergency department. Med Clin N Am. 2001;85:971–85.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Edlow JA, Panagos PD, Godwin SA, Thomas TL, Decker WW. Clinical policy: critical issues in the evaluation and management of adult patients presenting to the emergency department with acute headache. Ann Emerg Med. 2008;52:407–36.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Silberstein SD. Practice parameter: evidence-based guidelines for migraine headache (an evidence-based review): report of the Quality Standards Subcommittee of the American Academy of Neurology. Neurology. 2000;55:754–62.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Broder J, Warshauer DM. Increasing utilization of computed tomography in the adult emergency department, 2000–2005. Emerg Radiol. 2006;13:25–30.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Friedman BW, Serrano D, Reed M, Diamond M, Lipton RB. Use of the emergency department for severe headache. A population-based study. Headache. 2009;49:21–30.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Brenner DJ, Hall EJ. Computed tomography–an increasing source of radiation exposure. N Engl J Med. 2007;357:2277–84.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Frisse ME, King JK, Rice WB, et al. A regional health information exchange: architecture and implementation. AMIA Annu Symp Proc. 2008:212–6.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Blumenthal HJ, Weisz MA, Kelly KM, Mayer RL, Blonsky J. Treatment of primary headache in the emergency department. Headache. 2003;43:1026–31.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Quan H, Sundararajan V, Halfon P, et al. Coding algorithms for defining comorbidities in ICD-9-CM and ICD-10 administrative data. Med Care. 2005;43:1130–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Quan H. ICD-9-CM enhanced Charlson SAS code. In: Winnepeg, Canada: Manitoba Centre for Health Policy; 2006.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Dietemann JL, Botelho C, Nogueira T, et al. Imaging in acute toxic encephalopathy. J Neuroradiol. 2004;31:313–26.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Weinstein MC, Siegel JE, Gold MR, Kamlet MS, Russell LB. Recommendations of the Panel on Cost-effectiveness in Health and Medicine. JAMA: J Am Med Assoc. 1996;276:1253–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Liang KY, Zeger S. Longitudinal data analysis using generalized linear models. Biometrika. 1986;73:13–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Beebe M, Dalton G, Duffy C, et al. Current Procedural Terminology CPT 2003: AMA Press; 2003.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Vest JR, Jasperson S, Zhao H, Gamm LD, Ohsfeldt RL. Use of a health information exchange system in the emergency care of children. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2011;11:78.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Gadd CS, Ho YX, Cala CM, et al. User perspectives on the usability of a regional health information exchange. J Am Med Inform Assoc: JAMIA. 2011;18:711–16.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Vest JR, Zhao H, Jasperson J, Gamm LD, Ohsfeldt RL. Factors motivating and affecting health information exchange usage. J Am Med Inform Assoc: JAMIA. 2011;18:143–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Mettler FA Jr, Bhargavan M, Faulkner K, et al. Radiologic and nuclear medicine studies in the United States and worldwide: frequency, radiation dose, and comparison with other radiation sources–1950–2007. Radiology. 2009;253:520–31.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Tsushima Y, Endo K. MR imaging in the evaluation of chronic or recurrent headache. Radiology. 2005;235:575–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Frishberg BM. The utility of neuroimaging in the evaluation of headache in patients with normal neurologic examinations. Neurology. 1994;44:1191–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Sodickson A, Baeyens PF, Andriole KP, et al. Recurrent CT, cumulative radiation exposure, and associated radiation-induced cancer risks from CT of adults. Radiology. 2009;251:175–84.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    New Choice Health Medical Cost Comparison. New Choice Health, Inc, 2011. (Accessed April 11, 2012, at http://www.newchoicehealth.com).
  34. 34.
    Vest JR, Jasperson J. What should we measure? Conceptualizing usage in health information exchange. J Am Med Inform Assoc: JAMIA. 2010;17:302–7.PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Society of General Internal Medicine 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • James E. Bailey
    • 1
    • 2
  • Jim Y. Wan
    • 2
  • Lisa M. Mabry
    • 1
  • Stephen H. Landy
    • 3
  • Rebecca A. Pope
    • 1
  • Teresa M. Waters
    • 2
  • Mark E. Frisse
    • 4
  1. 1.Division of General Internal Medicine, Department of MedicineUniversity of Tennessee Health Science CenterMemphisUSA
  2. 2.Department of Preventive MedicineUniversity of Tennessee Health Science CenterMemphisUSA
  3. 3.Department of NeurologyUniversity of Tennessee Health Science CenterMemphisUSA
  4. 4.Department of Biomedical InformaticsVanderbilt University Medical CenterNashvilleUSA

Personalised recommendations