Maintenance Notice

Due to necessary scheduled maintenance, the JMIR Publications website will be unavailable from Wednesday, July 01, 2020 at 8:00 PM to 10:00 PM EST. We apologize in advance for any inconvenience this may cause you.

Who will be affected?

Advertisement

Accepted for/Published in: JMIR Medical Informatics

Date Submitted: Nov 8, 2019
Open Peer Review Period: Nov 8, 2019 - Jan 3, 2020
Date Accepted: Apr 12, 2020
(closed for review but you can still tweet)

The final, peer-reviewed published version of this preprint can be found here:

Categorization of Third-Party Apps in Electronic Health Record App Marketplaces: Systematic Search and Analysis

Ritchie J, Welch B

Categorization of Third-Party Apps in Electronic Health Record App Marketplaces: Systematic Search and Analysis

JMIR Med Inform 2020;8(5):e16980

DOI: 10.2196/16980

PMID: 32469324

PMCID: 7293052

Warning: This is an author submission that is not peer-reviewed or edited. Preprints - unless they show as "accepted" - should not be relied on to guide clinical practice or health-related behavior and should not be reported in news media as established information.

A review and comparison of third-party software applications for electronic health records

  • Jordon Ritchie; 
  • Brandon Welch; 

ABSTRACT

Background:

Third-party electronic health record (EHR) apps are available to allow healthcare organizations to extend the capabilities and features of their EHR. Given the widespread utilization of EHRs, and the emergence of third-party apps in EHR marketplaces, it has become necessary to conduct a systematic review and analysis of apps in EHR app marketplaces.

Objective:

The goal of this review is to organize, categorize, and characterize availability of third-party apps in EHR marketplaces.

Methods:

Two informaticists (JR & BW) used grounded theory principles to review and categorize EHR apps listed in top EHR vendors’ public-facing marketplaces.

Results:

We categorized a total of 471 EHR apps into a taxonomy consisting of 3 primary categories, 15 secondary categories, and 55 tertiary categories. The three primary categories were administrative (203 apps; 43.1%), provider support (159 apps; 33.8%), and patient care (109 apps; 23.1%). Within administrative apps, we split the apps into four secondary categories: front office (77 apps), financial (53 apps), office administration (49 apps), and office device integration (17 apps). Within the provider support primary classification, we split the apps into eight secondary categories: documentation (34 apps), records management (27 apps), care coordination (23 apps), population health (18 apps), EHR efficiency (16 apps), ordering & prescribing (15 apps), medical device integration (13 apps) and specialty EHR (12 apps). Within the patient care primary classification, we split the apps into three secondary categories: patient engagement (50 apps), clinical decision support (40 apps), and remote care (18 apps). Total app counts varied substantially across EHR vendors. Overall distribution of apps across primary categories were relatively similar with a few exceptions.

Conclusions:

We characterized and organized a diverse and rich set of third-party EHR apps. This work provides an important reference for developers, researchers, and EHR customers to more easily search, review, and compare apps in EHR app stores.


 Citation

Please cite as:

Ritchie J, Welch B

A review and comparison of third-party software applications for electronic health records

JMIR Preprints. 08/11/2019:16980

DOI: 10.2196/preprints.16980

URL: https://preprints.jmir.org/preprint/16980

PMID: 32469324

PMCID: 7293052

Download PDF


Request queued. Please wait while the file is being generated. It may take some time.

© The authors. All rights reserved. This is a privileged document currently under peer-review/community review (or an accepted/rejected manuscript). Authors have provided JMIR Publications with an exclusive license to publish this preprint on it's website for review and ahead-of-print citation purposes only. While the final peer-reviewed paper may be licensed under a cc-by license on publication, at this stage authors and publisher expressively prohibit redistribution of this draft paper other than for review purposes.