Clinical and Technical Considerations of an Open Access Telehealth Network in South Carolina: Definition and Deployment

Abstract

Background Today, telehealth is experiencing exponential growth in utilization. Paralleling this trend is the growth in the telehealth industry, with sharp increases in the number of platforms, functionalities, and levels of integrations within both the electronic health record and other technical systems supporting health care. When a telehealth network is intended to be used across independent health care systems, an additional layer of complexity emerges. In the context of regionalized telehealth networks that are not within the same health care system, not only are technical interoperability challenges a practical barrier, but administrative, clinical, and competitive elements also quickly emerge, resulting in fragmented, siloed technologies. Objective The study aimed to describe a statewide approach to deploying an interoperable open access telehealth network across multiple health systems. Methods One promising solution to the abovementioned concerns is an open access telehealth network. In the field of telehealth, an open access network (OAN) can be defined as a network infrastructure that can be used by health care providers without a closed or proprietary platform, specific obligatory network, or service-specific telehealth technologies. This framework for the development of an OAN is grounded in practical examples of clinical programs that function in each stage of network maturity based on the experience of the South Carolina Telehealth Alliance (SCTA). The SCTA’s experience details successes and challenges in an ongoing effort to achieve an OAN. The model describes an OAN in stages of collaborative maturity and provides insights into the technological, clinical, and administrative implications of making the collaboration possible. Results The four stages of an OAN are defined according to operational maturity, ranging from feasibility to demonstration of implementation. Each stage is associated with infrastructure and resource requirements and technical and clinical activities. In stage 1, technical standards are agreed upon, and the clinical programs are designed to utilize compliant technologies. In stage 2, collaboration is demonstrated through technical teams working together to address barriers, whereas clinical and administrative teams share best practices. In stage 3, a functional interoperable network is demonstrated with different institutions providing service through common telehealth end points at different patient care sites. In stage 4, clinical workflows are streamlined and standardized across institutions, and economies of scale are achieved through technical and administrative innovations. Conclusions The approach to OAN development described provides a roadmap for achieving a functional telehealth network across independent health systems. The South Carolina experience reveals both successes and challenges in achieving this goal. The next steps toward the development of OANs include advocacy and ongoing engagement with the developers of telehealth technologies regarding their commitment to interoperability.

Expansion of telehealth in primary care during the COVID-19 pandemic: benefits and barriers

“…King et al (2020) discussed the challenges associated with statewide implementation of telehealth programs and ensuring open access to providers to meet the needs of telehealth consumers. The authors compared the growth of telehealth technologies to that of the electronic health record (EHR); although well-intended, telehealth brought about many fragmented and siloed technologies that created barriers to interoperability (King et al, 2020). The surge of telehealth with COVID-19 created a demand for increased access to electronic health information across health care institutions (King et al, 2020).…”

“…The authors compared the growth of telehealth technologies to that of the electronic health record (EHR); although well-intended, telehealth brought about many fragmented and siloed technologies that created barriers to interoperability (King et al, 2020). The surge of telehealth with COVID-19 created a demand for increased access to electronic health information across health care institutions (King et al, 2020). Barriers such as the usability of electronic health information exchanged among EHR systems needed to be addressed quickly.…”

“…This includes the relevance, accessibility, and comprehensibility of the health information exchanged to ensure quality care of health care consumers. The COVID-19 pandemic catapulted many changes across health care systems (King et al, 2020). Johnson (2020) talked about the changes that were necessary at the Boston Medical Center intensive care unit (ICU) to improve the monitoring of patients.…”

“…With COVID-19, telehealth transcended all health care settings and populations, leading to a need to address numerous obstacles. King et al (2020) discussed the challenges associated with statewide implementation of telehealth programs and ensuring open access to providers to meet the needs of telehealth consumers. The authors compared the growth of telehealth technologies to that of the electronic health record (EHR); although well-intended, telehealth brought about many fragmented and siloed technologies that created barriers to interoperability (King et al, 2020).…”

Syndromic Surveillance Using Structured Telehealth Data: Case Study of the First Wave of COVID-19 in Brazil

“…Using health information platforms, health care workers can systematically collect qualified data on suspected cases. Such data can be used as a proxy for the spread of infectious diseases for health surveillance [ 6 - 11 ].…”