A comparison of how four countries use health IT to support care for people with chronic conditions

• Published in: Health Affairs Vol. 33; no. 9; pp. 1559 - 1566
• Main Authors: Adler-Milstein, Julia, Sarma, Nandini, Woskie, Liana R, Jha, Ashish K
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: United States The People to People Health Foundation, Inc., Project HOPE 01.09.2014
• Subjects: Australia; Best practice; Canada; Chronic Disease - therapy; Chronic Illness; Chronic illnesses; Chronically ill; Computerized physician order entry; Delivery of Health Care - organization & administration; Denmark; Disease Management; Electronic Health Records; Health care industry; Health Care Services; Health Planning; Health Services Research; High income; Humans; Industrialized nations; Information Technology; Medical Informatics - trends; Medical records; Medical service; Models, Organizational; Patients; Personal health; Primary care; Records; Studies; Telecommunications; Telemedicine; United States; Web portals; Denmark; Canada; Australia; United States; United States > US; Developed World < International/global health studies; Organization and Delivery of Care; Information Technology
• ISSN: 0278-2715; 1544-5208
• DOI: 10.1377/hlthaff.2014.0424

Countries around the globe are investing in health information and communications technologies (ICTs) as critical tools for improving care for chronically ill patients. We profiled four high-income nations with varied health ICT strategies--Australia, Canada, Denmark, and the United States--to describe their use of ICTs to improve chronic care. Our goal was to identify common challenges and opportunities for cross-national learning. We found four key themes. First, although all four countries have a national strategy for health ICT adoption, strategies are implemented and adapted to chronic care needs regionally, which creates the challenge of spreading successful efforts across regions. Second, each country struggles with how to ensure that clinical information follows patients seamlessly between care settings. Third, although each nation is pursuing telehealth solutions as a component of chronic care, the telehealth initiatives are usually stand-alone efforts that are not well integrated into other ICT solutions, such as electronic health records. Finally, countries have made progress in improving patients' access to their clinical data but have not fully succeeded in engaging patients to apply the data to improve care. These common themes suggest that although the four nations have different health care systems and ICT strategies, all of them face a similar set of challenges, creating an opportunity for cross-national learning.