Article

Distributed Health Data Networks A Practical and Preferred Approach to Multi-Institutional Evaluations of Comparative Effectiveness, Safety, and Quality of Care

Department of Population Medicine, Harvard Medical School and Harvard Pilgrim Health Care Institute, Boston, MA 02215, USA.
Medical care (Impact Factor: 2.94). 06/2010; 48(6 Suppl):S45-51. DOI: 10.1097/MLR.0b013e3181d9919f
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Comparative effectiveness research, medical product safety evaluation, and quality measurement will require the ability to use electronic health data held by multiple organizations. There is no consensus about whether to create regional or national combined (eg, "all payer") databases for these purposes, or distributed data networks that leave most Protected Health Information and proprietary data in the possession of the original data holders.
Demonstrate functions of a distributed research network that supports research needs and also address data holders concerns about participation. Key design functions included strong local control of data uses and a centralized web-based querying interface.
We implemented a pilot distributed research network and evaluated the design considerations, utility for research, and the acceptability to data holders of methods for menu-driven querying. We developed and tested a central, web-based interface with supporting network software. Specific functions assessed include query formation and distribution, query execution and review, and aggregation of results.
This pilot successfully evaluated temporal trends in medication use and diagnoses at 5 separate sites, demonstrating some of the possibilities of using a distributed research network. The pilot demonstrated the potential utility of the design, which addressed the major concerns of both users and data holders. No serious obstacles were identified that would prevent development of a fully functional, scalable network.
Distributed networks are capable of addressing nearly all anticipated uses of routinely collected electronic healthcare data. Distributed networks would obviate the need for centralized databases, thus avoiding numerous obstacles.

2 Followers
 · 
93 Views
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Bi-directional translational pathways between scientific discoveries and primary care are crucial for improving individual patient care and population health. The Data QUEST pilot project is a program supporting data sharing amongst community based primary care practices and is built on a technical infrastructure to share electronic health record data. We developed a set of governance requirements from interviewing and collaborating with partner organizations. Recommendations from our partner organizations included: 1) partner organizations can physically terminate the link to the data sharing network and only approved data exits the local site; 2) partner organizations must approve or reject each query; 3) partner organizations and researchers must respect local processes, resource restrictions, and infrastructures; and 4) partner organizations can be seamlessly added and removed from any individual data sharing query or the entire network.
    04/2014; 2014:71-6.
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Mobile-bearing total knee prostheses were designed to reduce wear and improve implant survivorship following total knee arthroplasty. However, the benefit of mobile-bearing total knee arthroplasty remains unproven. Both mobile-bearing and fixed-bearing total knee arthroplasty implants are available in posterior-stabilized and non-posterior-stabilized designs. With the latter, the implant does not recreate the function of the posterior cruciate ligament (PCL) with a posterior-stabilizing cam mechanism. The purpose of the present study was to compare mobile-bearing, non-posterior-stabilized devices with fixed-bearing, non-posterior-stabilized devices used in total knee arthroplasty through a novel multinational study design. Through the use of a distributed health data network, primary total knee arthroplasties performed for osteoarthritis from 2001 to 2010 were identified from six national and regional total joint arthroplasty registries. Multivariate meta-analysis was performed with use of linear mixed models, with the primary outcome of interest being revision for any reason. Survival probabilities and their standard errors were extracted from each registry for each unique combination of the covariates. A total of 319,616 patients (60% female) underwent non-posterior-stabilized total knee arthroplasty. A fixed-bearing, non-posterior-stabilized design was used in 258,190 (81%) of the knees and a mobile-bearing, non-posterior-stabilized design in 61,426 (19%) of the knees. Sixty-nine percent of the patients who received a fixed-bearing implant were over sixty-five years of age, compared with 63% of those who received a mobile-bearing implant. Mobile-bearing designs had a higher risk of revision, with a hazard ratio of 1.43 (95% confidence interval, 1.36 to 1.51; p < 0.001). Previous comparisons of mobile-bearing and fixed-bearing total knee arthroplasty outcomes have been inconclusive. The current study utilized an advanced, harmonized distributed analysis of six national and regional joint-replacement registries. To our knowledge, it is the largest analysis of mobile-bearing total knee arthroplasty to date. Mobile-bearing, non-posterior-stabilized designs presented a greater risk of failure than was found for fixed-bearing, non-posterior-stabilized designs. Caution should be used in the selection of the mobile-bearing non-posterior-stabilized design for total knee replacement. Copyright © 2014 by The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, Incorporated.
    The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery 12/2014; 96(Supplement 1):52-58. DOI:10.2106/JBJS.N.00466 · 4.31 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Differences in survivorship of non-posterior-stabilized compared with posterior-stabilized knee designs carry substantial economic consequences, especially with limited health-care resources. However, these comparisons have often been made between relatively small groups of patients, often with short-term follow-up, with only small differences demonstrated between the groups. The goal of this study is to compare the outcomes of non-posterior-stabilized and posterior-stabilized total knee arthroplasties with use of a unique collaboration of multiple established knee arthroplasty registries. A distributed health data network was developed by the International Consortium of Orthopaedic Registries and was used in this study to reduce barriers to participation (such as security, propriety, legal, and privacy issues) compared with a centralized data warehouse approach. The study included only replacements in osteoarthritis patients who underwent total knee procedures involving fixed-bearing devices from 2001 to 2010. The outcome of interest was time to first revision. On average, not resurfacing showed a more harmful effect than resurfacing did when posterior-stabilized and non-posterior-stabilized knee replacements were compared, while the risk of revision for posterior-stabilized compared with non-posterior-stabilized knees was highest in year zero to one, followed by year one to two, years eight through ten, and years two through eight. Posterior-stabilized knees did significantly worse than non-posterior-stabilized knees did when the patella was not resurfaced. This difference was most pronounced in the first two years (year zero to one: hazard ratio [HR] = 2.15, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.56 to 2.95, p < 0.001; year one to two: HR = 1.61, 95% CI = 1.48 to 1.75, p < 0.001). When the patella was resurfaced, posterior-stabilized knees did significantly worse than non-posterior-stabilized knees did. This was again most pronounced in the first two years (year zero to one: HR = 1.75, 95% CI = 1.27 to 2.42, p = 0.001; year one to two: HR = 1.31, 95% CI = 1.19 to 1.45, p < 0.001). There was a reduced risk of revision with a patient age of more than sixty-five years (HR = 0.57, 95% CI = 0.55 to 0.60, p < 0.001). We found that fixed non-posterior-stabilized total knee arthroplasty performed better with or without patellar resurfacing than did fixed posterior-stabilized total knee arthroplasty. This effect was most pronounced in the first two years. The risk of revision for posterior-stabilized total knee arthroplasties was reduced with patellar resurfacing. Also, a patient age of more than sixty-five years and female gender reduced the risk of revision. Copyright © 2014 by The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, Incorporated.
    The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery 12/2014; 96(Supplement 1):65-72. DOI:10.2106/JBJS.N.00462 · 4.31 Impact Factor

Full-text (2 Sources)

Download
44 Downloads
Available from
Oct 24, 2014