Cargando…
Categorization of Third-Party Apps in Electronic Health Record App Marketplaces: Systematic Search and Analysis
BACKGROUND: Third-party electronic health record (EHR) apps allow health care organizations to extend the capabilities and features of their EHR system. Given the widespread utilization of EHRs and the emergence of third-party apps in EHR marketplaces, it has become necessary to conduct a systematic...
Autores principales: | , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
JMIR Publications
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7293052/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32469324 http://dx.doi.org/10.2196/16980 |
_version_ | 1783546223059271680 |
---|---|
author | Ritchie, Jordon Welch, Brandon |
author_facet | Ritchie, Jordon Welch, Brandon |
author_sort | Ritchie, Jordon |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Third-party electronic health record (EHR) apps allow health care organizations to extend the capabilities and features of their EHR system. Given the widespread utilization of EHRs and the emergence of third-party apps in EHR marketplaces, it has become necessary to conduct a systematic review and analysis of apps in EHR app marketplaces. OBJECTIVE: The goal of this review is to organize, categorize, and characterize the availability of third-party apps in EHR marketplaces. METHODS: Two informaticists (authors JR and BW) used grounded theory principles to review and categorize EHR apps listed in top EHR vendors’ public-facing marketplaces. RESULTS: We categorized a total of 471 EHR apps into a taxonomy consisting of 3 primary categories, 15 secondary categories, and 55 tertiary categories. The three primary categories were administrative (n=203, 43.1%), provider support (n=159, 33.8%), and patient care (n=109, 23.1%). Within administrative apps, we split the apps into four secondary categories: front office (n=77, 37.9%), financial (n=53, 26.1%), office administration (n=49, 24.1%), and office device integration (n=17, 8.4%). Within the provider support primary classification, we split the apps into eight secondary categories: documentation (n=34, 21.3%), records management (n=27, 17.0%), care coordination (n=23, 14.4%), population health (n=18, 11.3%), EHR efficiency (n=16, 10.1%), ordering and prescribing (n=15, 9.4%), medical device integration (n=13, 8.2%), and specialty EHR (n=12, 7.5%). Within the patient care primary classification, we split the apps into three secondary categories: patient engagement (n=50, 45.9%), clinical decision support (n=40, 36.7%), and remote care (n=18, 16.5%). Total app counts varied substantially across EHR vendors. Overall, the distribution of apps across primary categories were relatively similar, with a few exceptions. CONCLUSIONS: We characterized and organized a diverse and rich set of third-party EHR apps. This work provides an important reference for developers, researchers, and EHR customers to more easily search, review, and compare apps in EHR app marketplaces. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7293052 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2020 |
publisher | JMIR Publications |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-72930522020-06-19 Categorization of Third-Party Apps in Electronic Health Record App Marketplaces: Systematic Search and Analysis Ritchie, Jordon Welch, Brandon JMIR Med Inform Original Paper BACKGROUND: Third-party electronic health record (EHR) apps allow health care organizations to extend the capabilities and features of their EHR system. Given the widespread utilization of EHRs and the emergence of third-party apps in EHR marketplaces, it has become necessary to conduct a systematic review and analysis of apps in EHR app marketplaces. OBJECTIVE: The goal of this review is to organize, categorize, and characterize the availability of third-party apps in EHR marketplaces. METHODS: Two informaticists (authors JR and BW) used grounded theory principles to review and categorize EHR apps listed in top EHR vendors’ public-facing marketplaces. RESULTS: We categorized a total of 471 EHR apps into a taxonomy consisting of 3 primary categories, 15 secondary categories, and 55 tertiary categories. The three primary categories were administrative (n=203, 43.1%), provider support (n=159, 33.8%), and patient care (n=109, 23.1%). Within administrative apps, we split the apps into four secondary categories: front office (n=77, 37.9%), financial (n=53, 26.1%), office administration (n=49, 24.1%), and office device integration (n=17, 8.4%). Within the provider support primary classification, we split the apps into eight secondary categories: documentation (n=34, 21.3%), records management (n=27, 17.0%), care coordination (n=23, 14.4%), population health (n=18, 11.3%), EHR efficiency (n=16, 10.1%), ordering and prescribing (n=15, 9.4%), medical device integration (n=13, 8.2%), and specialty EHR (n=12, 7.5%). Within the patient care primary classification, we split the apps into three secondary categories: patient engagement (n=50, 45.9%), clinical decision support (n=40, 36.7%), and remote care (n=18, 16.5%). Total app counts varied substantially across EHR vendors. Overall, the distribution of apps across primary categories were relatively similar, with a few exceptions. CONCLUSIONS: We characterized and organized a diverse and rich set of third-party EHR apps. This work provides an important reference for developers, researchers, and EHR customers to more easily search, review, and compare apps in EHR app marketplaces. JMIR Publications 2020-05-29 /pmc/articles/PMC7293052/ /pubmed/32469324 http://dx.doi.org/10.2196/16980 Text en ©Jordon Ritchie, Brandon Welch. Originally published in JMIR Medical Informatics (http://medinform.jmir.org), 29.05.2020. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work, first published in JMIR Medical Informatics, is properly cited. The complete bibliographic information, a link to the original publication on http://medinform.jmir.org/, as well as this copyright and license information must be included. |
spellingShingle | Original Paper Ritchie, Jordon Welch, Brandon Categorization of Third-Party Apps in Electronic Health Record App Marketplaces: Systematic Search and Analysis |
title | Categorization of Third-Party Apps in Electronic Health Record App Marketplaces: Systematic Search and Analysis |
title_full | Categorization of Third-Party Apps in Electronic Health Record App Marketplaces: Systematic Search and Analysis |
title_fullStr | Categorization of Third-Party Apps in Electronic Health Record App Marketplaces: Systematic Search and Analysis |
title_full_unstemmed | Categorization of Third-Party Apps in Electronic Health Record App Marketplaces: Systematic Search and Analysis |
title_short | Categorization of Third-Party Apps in Electronic Health Record App Marketplaces: Systematic Search and Analysis |
title_sort | categorization of third-party apps in electronic health record app marketplaces: systematic search and analysis |
topic | Original Paper |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7293052/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32469324 http://dx.doi.org/10.2196/16980 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT ritchiejordon categorizationofthirdpartyappsinelectronichealthrecordappmarketplacessystematicsearchandanalysis AT welchbrandon categorizationofthirdpartyappsinelectronichealthrecordappmarketplacessystematicsearchandanalysis |