Health Informatics Standards: Bridging the Gap between Technology and Clinical Practice
, Manuscript No. ejbi-24-143177; , Pre QC No. ejbi-24-143177; QC No. ejbi-24-143177; , Manuscript No. ejbi-24-143177; Published: 26-Aug-2024
This open-access article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (CC BY-NC) (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/), which permits reuse, distribution and reproduction of the article, provided that the original work is properly cited and the reuse is restricted to noncommercial purposes. For commercial reuse, contact submissions@ejbi.org
Introduction
Health informatics is the intersection of information technology and healthcare, focusing on the efficient collection, storage, and use of health data to improve patient outcomes and streamline clinical workflows. As health informatics evolves, establishing standards has become crucial for ensuring interoperability, data security, and seamless integration of technology in clinical practice. This article explores the importance of health informatics standards, their key components, and how they bridge the gap between technology and clinical practice [1].
The importance of health informatics standards
Interoperability is the ability of different systems and organizations to work together seamlessly. Health informatics standards ensure that various healthcare systems can communicate and exchange data effectively. Without these standards, disparate systems would struggle to share information, leading to fragmented care and inefficiencies in clinical workflows. Health informatics standards play a critical role in safeguarding patient data. They provide guidelines for data encryption, access controls, and secure communication protocols, ensuring that sensitive health information is protected from unauthorized access and breaches. Compliance with standards such as the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) in the United States is essential for maintaining patient trust and legal compliance [2].
Improving data quality
Standardization helps in maintaining the consistency, accuracy, and reliability of health data. By adhering to standardized formats and terminologies, healthcare providers can ensure that data is comparable and meaningful across different systems and settings. This improves the quality of clinical decision-making and supports better patient outcomes. Health informatics standards enable the development of robust Clinical Decision Support Systems (CDSS). These systems rely on standardized data to provide accurate, evidence-based recommendations to clinicians at the point of care. Standards ensure that CDSS can integrate seamlessly with Electronic Health Records (EHRs) and other clinical systems, enhancing their utility and impact [3, 4].
Health Level Seven International (HL7) is a set of international standards for the exchange, integration, sharing, and retrieval of electronic health information. It includes messaging standards like HL7 v2 and the more recent HL7 Fast Healthcare Interoperability Resources (FHIR), which provides a framework for building RESTful APIs that facilitate data exchange between healthcare applications.
International Classification of Diseases (ICD) is a globally recognized system for coding diagnoses, symptoms, and procedures. Maintained by the World Health Organization (WHO), the ICD ensures that health conditions are consistently recorded, enabling reliable data comparison and analysis across different countries and healthcare systems [5, 6].
Systematized Nomenclature of Medicine Clinical Terms (SNOMED CT) is a comprehensive clinical terminology that provides standardized terms for diseases, findings, procedures, and other health-related concepts. It supports interoperability by ensuring that healthcare providers use consistent terminology, improving communication and data exchange [7].
Digital Imaging and Communications in Medicine (DICOM) is the standard for handling, storing, printing, and transmitting medical imaging information. It ensures that medical images and associated data can be exchanged and viewed across different imaging systems, facilitating better diagnosis and treatment planning. Continuity of Care Document (CCD) is a standard for the electronic exchange of patient summary information. It combines HL7's Clinical Document Architecture (CDA) with elements of the ASTM Continuity of Care Record (CCR) to provide a comprehensive summary of a patient’s health status, ensuring continuity of care across different providers and settings [8].
The adoption of EHRs has transformed healthcare by enabling the digital capture and storage of patient information. Health informatics standards ensure that EHR systems can communicate with other clinical systems, allowing for the seamless exchange of patient data. This integration supports coordinated care, reduces redundancies, and enhances the overall efficiency of clinical practice. Standards such as those for medication coding and e-prescribing reduce the risk of medication errors. By ensuring that drug information is consistently recorded and communicated, these standards help prevent adverse drug events and improve patient safety. E-prescribing standards, for instance, facilitate the electronic transmission of prescriptions from providers to pharmacies, minimizing errors associated with handwritten prescriptions.
Supporting telehealth and remote monitoring
The COVID-19 pandemic has accelerated the adoption of telehealth and remote monitoring technologies. Health informatics standards ensure that these technologies can integrate with existing clinical systems, enabling the secure exchange of patient data. Standards for telehealth platforms, such as those developed by HL7, support interoperability and ensure that remote care is effectively coordinated with in-person clinical practice. Standardized health data is essential for clinical research and population health management. By ensuring that data is comparable across different sources, health informatics standards enable large-scale data analysis and research. This supports the identification of health trends, the evaluation of treatment outcomes, and the development of evidence-based guidelines and policies [9, 10].
Addressing challenges in standardization
Despite the benefits, implementing health informatics standards poses several challenges. These include the complexity of standards, the need for ongoing updates, and the resistance to change among healthcare providers. Addressing these challenges requires collaboration between standard-setting organizations, healthcare providers, technology vendors, and policymakers.
Conclusion
Health informatics standards are vital for bridging the gap between technology and clinical practice. They ensure interoperability, enhance data security, and improve the quality of health data, supporting better patient outcomes and more efficient clinical workflows. As healthcare continues to evolve, the ongoing development and implementation of health informatics standards will be crucial for leveraging technology to its fullest potential. By addressing challenges and focusing on future directions, we can continue to advance health informatics and improve the delivery of care.
References
- Kang S, Thomas PBM, Sim DA, Parker RT, Daniel C, et al. Oculoplastic video-based telemedicine consultations: Covid-19 and beyond. Eye. 2020;34:1193–5.
- Deshmukh AV, Badakere A, Sheth J, Bhate M, Kulkarni S, et al. Pivoting to teleconsultation for paediatric ophthalmology and strabismus: our experience during COVID-19 times. Indian J Ophthalmol. 2020;68:1387–91.
- Scott Kruse C, Karem P, Shifflett K, Vegi L, Ravi K, et al. Evaluating barriers to adopting telemedicine worldwide: a systematic review. J Telemed Telecare. 2018;24:4–12.
- Schulz TR, Richards M, Gasko H, Lohrey J, Hibbert ME, et al. Telehealth: experience of the first 120 consultations delivered from a new refugee telehealth clinic. Intern Med J. 2014;44:981–5.
- Smith AC. Telemedicine: challenges and opportunities. Expert Rev Med Devices. 2007;4:5–7.
- Hung AJ, Chen J, Shah A, Gill IS. Telementoring and Telesurgery for Minimally Invasive Procedures. J Urol. 2018;199:355–69.
- Camara JG, Rodriguez RE. Real-time telementoring in ophthalmology. Telemed J. 1998;4:375–7.
- Camara JG, Zabala RR, Henson RD, Senft SH. Teleophthalmology: the use of real-time telementoring to remove an orbital tumor. Ophthalmology. 2000;107:1468–71.
- Talbot M, Harvey EJ, Berry GK, Reindl R, Tien H, et al. A pilot study of surgical telementoring for leg fasciotomy. J R Army Med Corps. 2018;164:83–6.
- Nguyen NT, Okrainec A, Anvari M, Smith B, Meireles O, et al. Sleeve gastrectomy telementoring: a SAGES multi-institutional quality improvement initiative. Surg Endosc. 2018;32:682–7.
Indexed at, Google Scholar, Cross Ref
Indexed at, Google Scholar, Cross Ref
Indexed at, Google Scholar, Cross Ref
Indexed at, Google Scholar, Cross Ref
Indexed at, Google Scholar, Cross Ref
Indexed at, Google Scholar, Cross Ref
Indexed at, Google Scholar, Cross Ref
Indexed at, Google Scholar, Cross Ref
Indexed at, Google Scholar, Cross Ref