Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2016 Apr 14;18(4):e75.
doi: 10.2196/jmir.5047.

A Patient-Centered Framework for Evaluating Digital Maturity of Health Services: A Systematic Review

Affiliations

A Patient-Centered Framework for Evaluating Digital Maturity of Health Services: A Systematic Review

Kelsey Flott et al. J Med Internet Res. .

Abstract

Background: Digital maturity is the extent to which digital technologies are used as enablers to deliver a high-quality health service. Extensive literature exists about how to assess the components of digital maturity, but it has not been used to design a comprehensive framework for evaluation. Consequently, the measurement systems that do exist are limited to evaluating digital programs within one service or care setting, meaning that digital maturity evaluation is not accounting for the needs of patients across their care pathways.

Objective: The objective of our study was to identify the best methods and metrics for evaluating digital maturity and to create a novel, evidence-based tool for evaluating digital maturity across patient care pathways.

Methods: We systematically reviewed the literature to find the best methods and metrics for evaluating digital maturity. We searched the PubMed database for all papers relevant to digital maturity evaluation. Papers were selected if they provided insight into how to appraise digital systems within the health service and if they indicated the factors that constitute or facilitate digital maturity. Papers were analyzed to identify methodology for evaluating digital maturity and indicators of digitally mature systems. We then used the resulting information about methodology to design an evaluation framework. Following that, the indicators of digital maturity were extracted and grouped into increasing levels of maturity and operationalized as metrics within the evaluation framework.

Results: We identified 28 papers as relevant to evaluating digital maturity, from which we derived 5 themes. The first theme concerned general evaluation methodology for constructing the framework (7 papers). The following 4 themes were the increasing levels of digital maturity: resources and ability (6 papers), usage (7 papers), interoperability (3 papers), and impact (5 papers). The framework includes metrics for each of these levels at each stage of the typical patient care pathway.

Conclusions: The framework uses a patient-centric model that departs from traditional service-specific measurements and allows for novel insights into how digital programs benefit patients across the health system.

Trial registration: N/A.

Keywords: digital maturity; evaluation; health information exchange; patient-centered care.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Conflicts of Interest: None declared.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Literature search and review strategy flow chart.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Themes from literature review.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Canadian electronic medical records (EMR) adoption and maturity model. Reproduced with permission from Canada's Health Informatics Association (COACH) [3].

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. NHS England . Five Year Forward View Internet. London: 2014. Oct, [2016-03-14]. https://www.england.nhs.uk/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/5yfv-web.pdf .
    1. National Information Board Personalised Health and Care 2020: Using Data and Technology to Transform Outcomes for Patients and Citizens: A Framework for Action. 2014. [2016-03-14]. https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/fil... .
    1. Ham C, Curry N. Integrated Care: What Is It? Does It Work? What Does It Mean for the NHS? London, UK: The King's Fund; 2011.
    1. DeLone WH, McLean ER. Information systems success: the quest for the dependent variable. Inf Syst Res. 1992;3:60–95. http://herbsleb.org/SCALEpapers/delone-information-1992.pdf
    1. COACH Canada’s Health Informatics Association Canadian EMR Adoption and Maturity Model: A Multi-Jurisdiction Collaborative and Common EMR Adoption and Maturity Model. 2013. Feb, [2016-03-14]. http://www.coachorg.com/en/resourcecentre/EMR-Adoption-White-Paper.asp .

Publication types

MeSH terms