Use Of Telemedicine For ED Physician Coverage In Critical Access Hospitals Increased After CMS Policy Clarification

2018 ◽  
Vol 37 (12) ◽  
pp. 2037-2044 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marcia M. Ward ◽  
Kimberly A. S. Merchant ◽  
Knute D. Carter ◽  
Xi Zhu ◽  
Fred Ullrich ◽  
...  
2016 ◽  
Vol 2016 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Joshua Dunn, Pharm.D. ◽  
◽  
Anne Teichman, Pharm.D. ◽  

JAMA ◽  
2011 ◽  
Vol 306 (15) ◽  
pp. 1653-1654 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. M. Westfall ◽  
C. Battaglia ◽  
M. Mills

2015 ◽  
Vol 35 (5) ◽  
pp. 62-67 ◽  
Author(s):  
Teresa J. Seright ◽  
Charlene A. Winters

What began as a grant-funded demonstration project, as a means of bridging the gap in rural health care, has developed into a critical access hospital system comprising 1328 facilities across 45 states. A critical access hospital is not just a safety net for health care in a rural community. Such hospitals may also provide specialized services such as same-day surgery, infusion therapy, and intensive care. For hospitals located near the required minimum of 35 miles from a tertiary care center, management of critically ill patients may be a matter of stabilization and transfer. Critical access hospitals in more rural areas are often much farther from tertiary care; some of these hospitals are situated within frontier areas of the United States. This article describes the development of critical access hospitals, provision of care and services, challenges to critical care in critical access hospitals, and suggestions to address gaps in research and collaborative care.


2013 ◽  
Vol 45 (1) ◽  
pp. 95
Author(s):  
Emily Fontane ◽  
Joseph Shiber

2018 ◽  
Vol 43 (4) ◽  
pp. 272-281 ◽  
Author(s):  
Larry R. Hearld ◽  
Nathaniel W. Carroll ◽  
Kristine R. Hearld ◽  
William Opoku-Agyeman

JAMA ◽  
2011 ◽  
Vol 306 (15) ◽  
pp. 1653 ◽  
Author(s):  
Martin S. Lipsky ◽  
Michael Glasser

2017 ◽  
Vol 24 (6) ◽  
pp. 1142-1148 ◽  
Author(s):  
Julia Adler-Milstein ◽  
A Jay Holmgren ◽  
Peter Kralovec ◽  
Chantal Worzala ◽  
Talisha Searcy ◽  
...  

Abstract Objective While most hospitals have adopted electronic health records (EHRs), we know little about whether hospitals use EHRs in advanced ways that are critical to improving outcomes, and whether hospitals with fewer resources – small, rural, safety-net – are keeping up. Materials and Methods Using 2008–2015 American Hospital Association Information Technology Supplement survey data, we measured “basic” and “comprehensive” EHR adoption among hospitals to provide the latest national numbers. We then used new supplement questions to assess advanced use of EHRs and EHR data for performance measurement and patient engagement functions. To assess a digital “advanced use” divide, we ran logistic regression models to identify hospital characteristics associated with high adoption in each advanced use domain. Results We found that 80.5% of hospitals adopted at least a basic EHR system, a 5.3 percentage point increase from 2014. Only 37.5% of hospitals adopted at least 8 (of 10) EHR data for performance measurement functions, and 41.7% of hospitals adopted at least 8 (of 10) patient engagement functions. Critical access hospitals were less likely to have adopted at least 8 performance measurement functions (odds ratio [OR] = 0.58; P < .001) and at least 8 patient engagement functions (OR = 0.68; P = 0.02). Discussion While the Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health Act resulted in widespread hospital EHR adoption, use of advanced EHR functions lags and a digital divide appears to be emerging, with critical-access hospitals in particular lagging behind. This is concerning, because EHR-enabled performance measurement and patient engagement are key contributors to improving hospital performance. Conclusion Hospital EHR adoption is widespread and many hospitals are using EHRs to support performance measurement and patient engagement. However, this is not happening across all hospitals.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document