Research ArticleOriginal Research

Using the Quadruple Aim Framework to Measure Impact of Heath Technology Implementation: A Case Study of eConsult

Clare Liddy and Erin Keely
The Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine May 2018, 31 (3) 445-455; DOI: https://doi.org/10.3122/jabfm.2018.03.170397

References

  1. 1.↵
    Canadian Institute for Health Information. Health care in Canada, 2012: A focus on wait times. Ottawa, ON: Canadian Institute for Health Information; 2012. Available from: https://secure.cihi.ca/free_products/HCIC2012-FullReport-ENweb.pdf. Accessed March 2, 2017.
  2. 2.↵
    1. Barua B,
    2. Esmail N
    . Waiting your turn: Wait times for health care in Canada. Vancouver, BC: Fraser Institute; 2013. Available from: https://www.fraser institute.org/sites/default/files/waiting-your-turn-2013.pdf. Accessed March 2, 2017.
  3. 3.↵
    1. Chen AH,
    2. Yee HF
    . Improving the primary care to specialty care interface: Getting from here to there. Arch Intern Med 2009;169:1024–6.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  4. 4.↵
    1. Barua B,
    2. Esmail N,
    3. Jackson T
    . The effect of wait times on mortality in Canada. Vancouver, BC: Fraser Institute; 2014. Available from: https://www.fraserinstitute.org/sites/default/files/effect-of-wait-times-on-mortality-in-canada.pdf. Accessed March 2, 2017.
  5. 5.↵
    1. Chen AH,
    2. Murphy EJ,
    3. Yee HF Jr.
    . eReferral–a new model for integrated care. N Engl J Med 2013;368:2450–3.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  6. 6.↵
    1. Palen TE,
    2. Price D,
    3. Shetterly S,
    4. et al
    . Comparing virtual consults to traditional consults using an electronic health record: An observational case-control study. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak 2012;12:65.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  7. 7.↵
    1. Kim Y,
    2. Chen AH,
    3. Keith E,
    4. et al
    . Not perfect, but better: Primary care providers' experiences with electronic referrals in a safety net health system. J Gen Intern Med 2009;24:614–9.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  8. 8.↵
    1. Kim-Hwang JE,
    2. Chen AH,
    3. Bell DS,
    4. et al
    . Evaluating electronic referrals for specialty care at a public hospital. J Gen Intern Med 2010;25:1123–8.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  9. 9.↵
    1. McAdams M,
    2. Cannavo L,
    3. Orlander JD
    . A medical specialty e-consult program in a VA health care system. Fed Pract 2014;31:26–31.
    OpenUrl
  10. 10.↵
    1. Rodriguez KL,
    2. Burkitt KH,
    3. Bayliss NK,
    4. et al
    . Veteran, primary care provider, and specialist satisfaction with electronic consultation. JMIR Med Inform 2015;3(1):e5.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  11. 11.↵
    1. Ammenwerth E,
    2. Talmon J,
    3. Ash JS,
    4. et al
    . Impact of CPOE on mortality cates—Contradictory findings, important messages. Methods Inf Med 2006;45:586–94.
    OpenUrlPubMedWeb of Science
  12. 12.↵
    National Audit Office. Review of the final benefits statement for programs previously managed under the National Programme for IT in the NHS. London, United Kingdom: NAO; 2013. Available from: https://www.nao.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/10171–001_NPfiT_Review.pdf. Accessed March 2, 2017.
  13. 13.↵
    1. Johnson CW
    . Case studies in the failure of healthcare information systems. Glasgow, United Kingdom: University of Glasgow; 2010. Available from: http://www.dcs.gla.ac.uk/∼johnson/papers/AHRQ/case_study.pdf. Accessed March 2, 2017.
  14. 14.↵
    1. Liddy C,
    2. Hogel M,
    3. Blazhko V,
    4. et al
    . The current state of electronic consultation & electronic referral systems in Canada: An environmental scan. Stud Health Technol Inform 2015;209:75–83.
    OpenUrl
  15. 15.↵
    1. Chang F,
    2. Gupta N
    . Progress in electronic medical record adoption in Canada. Canadian Family Physician 2015 Dec 1;61:1076–84.
  16. 16.↵
    1. Champlain BASE
    . Champlain BASE eConsult service. Available from: http://champlainbaseeconsult.com/ Accessed April 28, 2017.
  17. 17.↵
    1. Berwick D,
    2. Nolan T,
    3. Whittington J
    . The triple aim: Care, health and cost. Health Aff 2008;27:759–69.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  18. 18.↵
    1. Bodenheimer T,
    2. Sinsky C
    . From Triple to Quadruple Aim: Care of the patient requires care of the provider. Ann Fam Med 2014;12:573–6.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  19. 19.↵
    Canadian Institute for Health Information. How Canada compares: Results from the Commonwealth Fund's 2016 International Health Policy Survey of adults in 11 countries. Available from: https://www.cihi.ca/sites/default/files/document/text-alternative-version-2016-cmwf-en-web.pdf. Accessed April 28, 2017.
  20. 20.↵
    1. Davis K,
    2. Ballreich J
    . Equitable access to care–how the United States ranks internationally. N Engl J Med 2014;371:1567–70.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  21. 21.↵
    Government of Ontario. Personal Health Information Protection Act. Available: https://www.ontario.ca/laws/statute/04p03. Accessed July 21, 2017.
  22. 22.↵
    1. Keely E,
    2. Traczyk L,
    3. Liddy C
    . Patient perspectives on wait times and the referral-consultation process while attending a tertiary diabetes and endocrinology centre: Is eConsultation an acceptable option? Can J Diabetes 2015;39:325–9.
    OpenUrl
  23. 23.↵
    1. Joschko J,
    2. Liddy C,
    3. Moroz I,
    4. et al
    . Just a click away: Exploring patients' perspectives on receiving care through the Champlain BASETM eConsult service. Fam Pract 2017;35:93–98.
    OpenUrl
  24. 24.↵
    1. Liddy C,
    2. Moroz I,
    3. Afkham A,
    4. Keely E
    . Sustainability of a primary care driven eConsult service. Ann Fam Med 2018;16:120–28.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  25. 25.↵
    1. Liddy C,
    2. Afkham A,
    3. Drosinis P,
    4. et al
    . Impact and satisfaction with a new eConsult service: A mixed methods study of primary care providers. J Am Board Fam Med 2015;28:394–403.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  26. 26.↵
    1. Keely E,
    2. Drosinis P,
    3. Afkham A,
    4. et al
    . Perspectives of Champlain BASE specialist physicians: Their motivation, experiences and recommendations for providing eConsultations to primary care providers. Stud Health Technol Inform 2015;209:38–45.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  27. 27.↵
    Champlain BASE. Fact Sheets. Available from:http://www.champlainbaseeconsult.com/fact-sheets. Accessed July 31, 2017.
  28. 28.↵
    1. Liddy C,
    2. Drosinis P,
    3. Deri Armstrong C,
    4. et al
    . What are the cost savings associated with providing access to specialist care through the Champlain BASE eConsult service? A costing evaluation. BMJ Open 2016;6(6):e010920.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  29. 29.↵
    1. Champlain LHIN
    . Sub-Region Population Health Profiles. Available from: http://www.champlainlhin.on.ca/∼/media/sites/champlain/Goals_Achvmnts/IHSP/SubRegions/Data/201712SRHlthPrflsTechRptEN.pdf?la=en. Accessed April 4, 2018.
  30. 30.↵
    1. Johnston S,
    2. Liddy C,
    3. Hogg W,
    4. et al
    . Barriers and facilitators to recruitment of physicians and practices for primary care health services research at one centre. BMC Med Res Methodol 2010;10:109.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  31. 31.↵
    1. Liddy C,
    2. Drosinis P,
    3. Fogel A,
    4. et al
    . Prevention of delayed referrals through the Champlain BASE eConsult Service. Can Fam Physician 2017;63(8):e381–e386.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  32. 32.↵
    1. Liddy C,
    2. Poulin PA,
    3. Hunter Z,
    4. Smyth C,
    5. Keely E
    . Patient perspectives on wait times and the impact on their life: A waiting room survey in a chronic pain clinic. Scand J Pain 2017;17:53–7.
    OpenUrl
  33. 33.↵
    1. Liddy C,
    2. Nawar N,
    3. Moroz I,
    4. et al
    . Understanding patient referral wait times for specialty care in Ontario: A retrospective chart audit. Healthcare Policy 2018;13:59–69.
    OpenUrl
  34. 34.↵
    1. Wallace JE,
    2. Lemaire JB,
    3. Ghali WA
    . Physician wellness: a missing quality indicator. The Lancet. 2009;374:1714–21.
    OpenUrl
  35. 35.↵
    1. Rodriguez KL,
    2. Burkitt KH,
    3. Bayliss NK,
    4. et al
    . Veteran, primary care provider, and specialist satisfaction with electronic consultation. JMIR Med Inform 2015;3(1):e5.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  36. 36.↵
    1. Conley J,
    2. Jordan M,
    3. Ghali WA
    . Audit of the consultation process on general internal medicine services. Qual Saf Health Care 2009;18:59–62.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  37. 37.↵
    1. Tran C,
    2. Liddy C,
    3. Pinto N,
    4. et al
    . Impact of question content on e-consultation outcomes. Telemed J E Health 2016;22:216–22.
    OpenUrl
  38. 38.↵
    1. Tran C,
    2. Liu DM,
    3. Afkham A,
    4. et al
    . Harnessing e-consultations to improve practice-based learning in endocrinology. Can J Diabetes 2015;6:539.
    OpenUrl
  39. 39.↵
    1. Liddy C,
    2. Drosinis P,
    3. Keely E
    . Electronic consultation systems: Worldwide prevalence and their impact on patient care–a systematic review. Fam Pract 2016;33:274–85.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  40. 40.↵
    1. Vimalananda VG,
    2. Gupte G,
    3. Seraj SM,
    4. et al
    . Electronic consultations (e-consults) to improve access to specialty care: A systematic review and narrative synthesis. J Telemed Telecare 2015;21:323–30.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  41. 41.↵
    1. Wrenn K,
    2. Catschegn S,
    3. Cruz M,
    4. et al
    . Analysis of an electronic consultation program at an academic medical centre: Primary care provider questions, specialist responses, and primary care provider actions. J Telemed Telecare 2016;23:217–224.
    OpenUrl
  42. 42.↵
    1. Olayiwola JN,
    2. Anderson D,
    3. Jepeal N,
    4. et al
    . Electronic consultations to improve the primary care-specialty care interface for cardiology in the medically underserved: a cluster-randomized controlled trial. Ann Fam Med 2016;14:133–40.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  43. 43.↵
    1. Kahn E,
    2. Sossong S,
    3. Goh A,
    4. et al
    . Evaluation of skin cancer in northern California Kaiser Permanente's store-and-forward teledermatology referral program. Telemed J E Health 2013;19:780–5.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  44. 44.↵
    1. van der Heijden JP,
    2. de Keizer NF,
    3. et al
    . Teledermatology applied following patient selection by general practitioners in daily practice improves efficiency and quality of care at lower cost. Br J Dermatol 2011;165:1058–65.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  45. 45.↵
    1. Kim DH,
    2. Kim M,
    3. Kim H,
    4. et al
    . Early referral to a nephrologist improved patient survival: Prospective cohort study for end-stage renal disease in Korea. PLoS One 2013;8(1):e55323.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  46. 46.↵
    1. van der Linden MP,
    2. Le Cessie S,
    3. Raza K,
    4. et al
    . Long-term impact of delay in assessment of patients with early arthritis. Arthrit Rheum 2010;62:3537–46.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  47. 47.↵
    1. Karunanayake CP,
    2. Rennie DC,
    3. Hagel L,
    4. et al
    . Access to specialist care in rural Saskatchewan: The Saskatchewan rural health study. Healthcare (Basel) 2015;3:84–99.
    OpenUrl
  48. 48.↵
    1. Sabesan S
    . Specialist cancer care through telehealth models. Aust J Rural Health 2015;23:19–23.
    OpenUrl
Back to top

In this issue

Print
Download PDF
Article Alerts
Email Article
Citation Tools

Jump to section

Keywords