Benefits and barriers to electronic laboratory results reporting for notifiable diseases: the New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene experience.

Trang Quyen Nguyen, Lorna Thorpe, Hadi A. Makki, Farzad Mostashari

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: Despite national support for electronic laboratory reporting (ELR), the transition from paper to electronic reporting has been slow both nationally and locally. We assessed the ELR experience of New York City's surveillance programs to identify barriers to ELR implementation and generalizable lessons about automated electronic notifiable disease surveillance. METHODS: We conducted interviews with key staff of the New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene to evaluate ELR implementation. A review of paper and ELR disease reports enabled a comparison of the reporting systems. RESULTS: The completeness and timeliness of ELR were similar to, and sometimes better than, paper reporting for certain diseases. Incorporating electronic data into surveillance databases created new problems with data quality, shifted work demands, and required additional skills for data monitoring. ELR improved the handling of high-volume and time-sensitive diseases but did not completely automate reporting for diseases that required complicated assessments by staff. CONCLUSIONS: Although ELR streamlines data processing, electronic reporting has its own limitations. A more successful use of ELR can be achieved by understanding its strengths and limitations for different disease types.

Original languageEnglish (US)
JournalAmerican Journal of Public Health
Volume97 Suppl 1
DOIs
StatePublished - Apr 2007

Fingerprint

Mental Health
Health
Automatic Data Processing
Databases
Interviews

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health

Cite this

Benefits and barriers to electronic laboratory results reporting for notifiable diseases : the New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene experience. / Nguyen, Trang Quyen; Thorpe, Lorna; Makki, Hadi A.; Mostashari, Farzad.

In: American Journal of Public Health, Vol. 97 Suppl 1, 04.2007.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{ce9e02edba2f4030aa2f71c948b16f5d,
title = "Benefits and barriers to electronic laboratory results reporting for notifiable diseases: the New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene experience.",
abstract = "OBJECTIVES: Despite national support for electronic laboratory reporting (ELR), the transition from paper to electronic reporting has been slow both nationally and locally. We assessed the ELR experience of New York City's surveillance programs to identify barriers to ELR implementation and generalizable lessons about automated electronic notifiable disease surveillance. METHODS: We conducted interviews with key staff of the New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene to evaluate ELR implementation. A review of paper and ELR disease reports enabled a comparison of the reporting systems. RESULTS: The completeness and timeliness of ELR were similar to, and sometimes better than, paper reporting for certain diseases. Incorporating electronic data into surveillance databases created new problems with data quality, shifted work demands, and required additional skills for data monitoring. ELR improved the handling of high-volume and time-sensitive diseases but did not completely automate reporting for diseases that required complicated assessments by staff. CONCLUSIONS: Although ELR streamlines data processing, electronic reporting has its own limitations. A more successful use of ELR can be achieved by understanding its strengths and limitations for different disease types.",
author = "Nguyen, {Trang Quyen} and Lorna Thorpe and Makki, {Hadi A.} and Farzad Mostashari",
year = "2007",
month = "4",
doi = "10.2105/AJPH.2006.098996",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "97 Suppl 1",
journal = "American Journal of Public Health",
issn = "0090-0036",
publisher = "American Public Health Association Inc.",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Benefits and barriers to electronic laboratory results reporting for notifiable diseases

T2 - the New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene experience.

AU - Nguyen, Trang Quyen

AU - Thorpe, Lorna

AU - Makki, Hadi A.

AU - Mostashari, Farzad

PY - 2007/4

Y1 - 2007/4

N2 - OBJECTIVES: Despite national support for electronic laboratory reporting (ELR), the transition from paper to electronic reporting has been slow both nationally and locally. We assessed the ELR experience of New York City's surveillance programs to identify barriers to ELR implementation and generalizable lessons about automated electronic notifiable disease surveillance. METHODS: We conducted interviews with key staff of the New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene to evaluate ELR implementation. A review of paper and ELR disease reports enabled a comparison of the reporting systems. RESULTS: The completeness and timeliness of ELR were similar to, and sometimes better than, paper reporting for certain diseases. Incorporating electronic data into surveillance databases created new problems with data quality, shifted work demands, and required additional skills for data monitoring. ELR improved the handling of high-volume and time-sensitive diseases but did not completely automate reporting for diseases that required complicated assessments by staff. CONCLUSIONS: Although ELR streamlines data processing, electronic reporting has its own limitations. A more successful use of ELR can be achieved by understanding its strengths and limitations for different disease types.

AB - OBJECTIVES: Despite national support for electronic laboratory reporting (ELR), the transition from paper to electronic reporting has been slow both nationally and locally. We assessed the ELR experience of New York City's surveillance programs to identify barriers to ELR implementation and generalizable lessons about automated electronic notifiable disease surveillance. METHODS: We conducted interviews with key staff of the New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene to evaluate ELR implementation. A review of paper and ELR disease reports enabled a comparison of the reporting systems. RESULTS: The completeness and timeliness of ELR were similar to, and sometimes better than, paper reporting for certain diseases. Incorporating electronic data into surveillance databases created new problems with data quality, shifted work demands, and required additional skills for data monitoring. ELR improved the handling of high-volume and time-sensitive diseases but did not completely automate reporting for diseases that required complicated assessments by staff. CONCLUSIONS: Although ELR streamlines data processing, electronic reporting has its own limitations. A more successful use of ELR can be achieved by understanding its strengths and limitations for different disease types.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=34250793873&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=34250793873&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.2105/AJPH.2006.098996

DO - 10.2105/AJPH.2006.098996

M3 - Article

C2 - 17413058

AN - SCOPUS:34250793873

VL - 97 Suppl 1

JO - American Journal of Public Health

JF - American Journal of Public Health

SN - 0090-0036

ER -