Perspectives in health information management / AHIMA, American Health Information Management Association最新文献

This study explored possible success factors for health information management certification exams. Based on the American Health Information Management Association (AHIMA) website, in 2018 and 2019, only 70 percent of first-time test takers passed the Registered Health Information Administrator (RHIA) exam; 26 percent passed the Certified Health Data Analyst (CHDA) exam in 2018; and only 10 percent passed the Certified Health Data Analyst exam in 2019. A quantitative systematic review and meta-analysis offered insight into factors related to passing certification exams. Sources included existing, relevant peer-reviewed and published literature since 1990 within 87 educational and health/medicine databases and 62 other articles and journal databases available at the University of South Dakota library. Outcomes from the systematic review include illumination of factors for passing health information management, healthcare, and education certification exams. Ultimately, this new information will help improve pass rates on certification exams.

Health information management (HIM) and health informatics (HI) are two similar but distinct disciplines. They share a common goal in terms of using information technologies and information power to improve the quality and efficiency of patient care; contribute to disease prevention and treatment; and improve overall population health. HIM professionals are primarily focused on managing health information, and HI professionals are primarily focused on the technologies and systems that make health information management possible. The right combination of the breadth of knowledge HIM professionals possess and the depth of knowledge HI professionals bring into the various areas constituting the scopes of the two disciplines can strengthen an organization's potential and growth in a complex, fast-changing healthcare environment.

This study explored possible success factors for passing the Registered Health Information Administration (RHIA) certification exam. According to the American Health Information Management Association (AHIMA), only 70 percent of first-time test-takers passed the RHIA exam in 2019. A literature review offered insight into factors related to passing certification exams. Sources included existing, relevant peer-reviewed and published literature since 1990 within 87 educational and health/medicine databases and 62 other articles and journal databases available at the University of South Dakota library. A correlational design was used in the study. Data was retrieved from AHIMA, cleaned, and binary logistic regression analysis was completed. A significant relationship was identified between having a prior credential, such as the Registered Health Information Technician (RHIT) credential and passing the RHIA exam. This new information will help improve pass rates, advance the HIM field research base, and help students improve their odds of passing the RHIA exam.

Medicare fraud has been the cause of up to $60 billion in overpaid claims in 2015 alone. Upcoding occurs when a healthcare provider has submitted codes for more severe conditions than diagnosed for the patient to receive higher reimbursement. The purpose of this study was to assess the impact of Medicare and Medicaid fraud to determine the magnitude of upcoding inpatient and outpatient claims throughout reimbursements. The methodology for this study utilized a literature review. The literature review analyzed physician upcoding throughout present on admission infections, diagnostic related group upcoding, emergency department, and clinic upcoding. It was found that upcoding has had an impact on Medicare payments and fraud. Medicare fraud has been reported to be the magnitude of upcoding inpatient and outpatient claims throughout Medicare reimbursements. In addition, fraudulent activity has increased with upcoding for ambulatory inpatient and outpatient charges for patients with Medicare and Medicaid.

Background: Self-management of diabetes is key for achieving positive clinical outcomes, with personal health records (PHRs) proposed as a patient-centered technology for facilitating self-care. However, few studies have described patient engagement with a PHR, including facilitators and barriers to use from the perspective of actual users.

Objectives: To compare use of a standalone PHR by patients with Type 2 diabetes to usual care through assessment of self-care behaviors, and short-term impact on social cognitive outcomes and hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c).

Methods: A mixed-methods design combining a comparative effectiveness pilot with qualitative interviews was used. Qualitative interviews explored the primary outcome of changes in self-care behaviors, while quantitative data obtained from health records and a survey focused on social cognitive and clinical outcomes.

Results: A total of 117 participants completed the study (intervention group = 56, control group = 61). Only 23 individuals used the PHR at least once after baseline. Five themes emerged from the qualitative analysis describing participants' experiences with the PHR and identifying reasons for lack of engagement. Quantitative findings supported qualitative results with no significant changes in HbA1c and only a significant increase in diabetes knowledge in the intervention group.

Conclusions: Study findings revealed low PHR uptake and minimal impact on study outcomes, including lack of communication and information-sharing between patients and providers. Future research should explore the fit of PHRs within the context of other self-management tools, integration with provider workflow, and the need for enhanced functionalities beyond an information repository to optimally support patient self-care.

Introduction: COVID-19 has drastically transformed healthcare delivery and forced many to utilize telehealth. This study aimed to comprehensively evaluate the telehealth service "Sehha" used during COVID-19 in Saudi Arabia and assess the provider experience and satisfaction with Sehha.

Methods: A questionnaire was distributed by the Ministry of Health (MoH) to 362 physicians using Sehha. The questionnaire items were adapted from previous studies and then tested for content validity and reliability (α = 0.88).

Results: The findings showed that most of the physicians improved their experience in telehealth because of COVID-19. The majority of the physicians (67.6 percent) reported being satisfied with Sehha. However, the most commonly perceived challenge by the physicians was difficulty in providing accurate medical assessments.

Conclusion: COVID-19 has remarkably uncovered numerous benefits of telehealth. Therefore, telehealth should remain a permanent model of healthcare delivery with consideration of further telehealth development initiatives.

Not so long ago, defining the "medical record" was simple. It was the paper chart-volume upon volume that captured the serial, dutifully recorded events of a person's health care at a hospital or physician's office. Entries were typically handwritten, dated and timed, and signed in ink with title (i.e., authenticated). Errors were easily identified by an authenticated strike-through. Similarly, the paper chart was synonymous with the legal medical record (LMR). In other words, a patient's paper chart was that patient's LMR by definition, even if critical data was omitted or irrelevant data was included. Fast-forward to 2021 and the use of technology for capturing the record of a patient's care. Technology has brought new challenges as well as successes. For example, pervasive and persistent mythologies include that 1) a patient's electronic health record (EHR) is the LMR, and 2) patient-specific EHR printouts to paper or disc-or displays on monitors-are necessarily equivalents to the paper chart of the 1980s. Neither are true. We now must define at the outset what is included in the LMR/designated record set to ensure the accuracy of what is retained and released.

This is a case study of the implementation of a data and analytics-enabled Mission Control at one of the largest healthcare service providers in the state of Washington. Using data analytics and artificial intelligence, CHI-Franciscan (one of the largest healthcare organizations in state of Washington) is able to coordinate patient care more effectively and efficiently, improving safety for all its patients. This case study demonstrates tangible evidence from quantitative and qualitative analysis for return on investment for such a large project.

This study explored possible success factors for passing the Certified Health Data Analyst Administration (CHDA) certification exam. According to the American Health Information Management Association (AHIMA), in 2019, only 10 percent of first-time test-takers passed the CHDA exam. Literature review offered insight into factors related to passing certification exams. Sources included existing, relevant peer-reviewed, and published literature since 1990 within 87 educational and health/medicine databases and 62 other articles and journal databases available at the University of South Dakota library. A correlational design was used in the study. Data was retrieved from AHIMA, cleaned, and data analysis was completed using binary logistic regression analysis. The CHDA study results indicate that candidates between ages 30 and 49 are less likely to pass the exam than those ages 50 and above, and those candidates with a master's degree are more likely to pass the exam than those with an associate or bachelor's degree. This new information will help improve the exam pass rates, provide a foundation for CHDA exam research, and add new knowledge in the HIM professional body of research.

Introduction: Diabetes mellitus is known as a major chronic disease that has a number of consequences affecting individuals' health conditions and socioeconomic aspects of life. These challenges require innovative interventions, such as self-management to improve patients' health condition and reduce the economic burden of healthcare systems. The current research aimed to identify patients' and physicians' perspectives about the use of health information technology in diabetes management in Iran.

Methods: This was a qualitative study conducted in 2019. In order to collect data, semi-structured interviews were conducted with eight patients and 10 specialists in an endocrine and metabolism research center and in a teaching hospital. The interviews were digitally recorded and transcribed verbatim. Finally, data were analyzed by using framework analysis method and MAXQDA version 10.

Results: According to the results, both patients and physicians believed that while using health information technology can improve access to healthcare services, the high cost of technology may hinder its usage. Factors such as government and health system support can motivate users to use the technology, and factors such as lack of user training and technical problems may have a negative impact on technology usage.

Conclusion: As a number of motivational and inhibitory factors may influence the use of health information technology in diabetes management, it is imperative to take each of these factors into account before designing and implementing new technologies, especially for diabetes management.