The American Health Information Management Association (AHIMA) 2017 Information Governance (IG) survey follows previous surveys administered in 2014 and 2015 to identify trends and offer insights associated with the healthcare industry’s understanding and adoption of IG. The good news from the 2017 survey is that awareness of IG, at least among the 1500+ survey respondents, is high with 84.6 percent reporting that they are familiar with IG. The bad news from the survey is that 51.6 percent of those same respondents report that lack of awareness or misunderstanding of IG is a barrier (the most significant barrier reported) to IG adoption in their organizations.
While the 2017 survey garnered more participation from outside the health information management professional community than previous efforts, it is important to note that the majority of respondents identified themselves as health information managers (HIM-ers). AHIMA’s work to raise IG awareness and educate the healthcare industry since 2012 has been significant and is to be commended. The body of knowledge created and published and the work completed is extraordinary; it has certainly paid off with its own constituents. Perhaps the survey demonstrates that there is still work to be done with additional stakeholders or that we need to do more to demonstrate the knowledge and capabilities that HIM-ers possess to support IG efforts.
IG Adoption, Drivers and Benefits
Based on what we see, read and experience, in every sector of the industry information and the data from which it is created are at the center of nearly every strategic and tactical activity. So why the disconnect, or the slow pace of formal IG adoption? Why did only 14.8 percent of respondents report an “initiated” IG program as illustrated below? Further, why did percent of respondents report that IG is not considered a priority in their organizations?
A closer look at what respondents had to say about the barriers to IG adoption is useful. The survey offered respondents a list of commonly-cited barriers to IG adoption across all industries and asked them to select their top three, resulting in the following:
For many, the term “governance” implies bureaucracy, expense, complexity, misplaced power and control, among other negative connotations. This may offer some context for these survey results and explain, in part, the top responses.
IG is a complex discipline, no doubt. However, everyone can identify IG or IG-like work that is getting done in their organization every day; it is just not formalized, organized or recognized as such. Sadly, much of that work is buried or siloed, in part, because it is not connected to a strategic imperative where it might gain greater visibility and appreciation as an IG effort.
The data around low IG adoption are even more confusing when we look at what respondents had to say about what they think does or should drive IG efforts. The survey demonstrates that there is no shortage of compelling and meaningful drivers to spur action. While the survey did not provide respondents with the same response choice options for “drivers” and “benefits” there was a connection and association reflected in the responses to these two questions.
These responses reflect an impressive number of business units, departments and individuals–workforce and patients—that can truly be served by and through IG.
What’s Changed from 2014 to 2017?
In 2014, 43% of respondents reported that a formal IG program had been initiated compared to 14.8% of respondents in 2017. What contributes to this dramatic change? Does it reflect organization abandonment of previously initiated IG efforts? Does it reflect that respondents are more educated today so what they labeled as IG in 2014 was not really IG? This area may warrant further exploration in future survey efforts.
In 2014, respondents cited “strong agreement” with regulatory compliance (80 percent), improvement in patient care and safety (73 percent) and the need to manage and contain costs (61 percent) as the top three drivers for IG, followed by analytics and business intelligence (53 percent). Interestingly, trust and confidence in data was the lowest rated driver. In 2017, data quality and trust ranked second. Analytics and business intelligence tops the list of drivers, patient safety falls to the middle and regulatory compliance is at the very bottom of the list.
The most promising insight from the 2017 survey is that data governance (DG) is a growing priority and reality in healthcare. Thirty percent of respondents reported a “formal structure” for DG in their organization. There is still a bit of confusion between IG and DG as disciplines. DG is one of the competencies in AHIMA’s IG Adoption Model and often referenced as a sub-domain of IG in other reference models. Simply stated, data are the building blocks of information, so DG is requisite to IG. One takeaway from the survey is that healthcare organizations are progressing along a path that positions DG as a precursor to IG, rather than a component of IG.
While the drivers for IG seem to have shifted over the time that AHIMA has spent surveying the industry, there is a universality to the vision and expectation that healthcare wants and needs to put its data and information to work to accomplish its ambitious and complex mission. Much of AHIMA’s and its IG partners’ work to document the experiences of IG pioneers is available at IGIQ.org.
Have ideas about how we can better study the topic of IG and deliver meaningful insights to you? Please share your comments.
About Stephanie Crabb
Stephanie is Co-Founder and Principal at Immersive, a healthcare data lifecycle management company where she leads program and solution development, knowledge management and customer success. Stephanie brings 25 years of experience in the healthcare industry where she has served in program/solution development, client service and business development roles for leading firms including The Advisory Board Company, WebMD, CTG Health Solutions and CynergisTek. She has led a number of program and product launches with an emphasis on competitive differentiation, rapid adoption, client satisfaction, and strategic portfolio management.
Prior to her work at these firms Stephanie worked for a large Maternal and Child Health Bureau grantee working on the national Bright Futures and Healthy Start initiatives to develop and document best practices in the care continuum for pediatrics and infant mortality, and to inform federal and state health policy initiatives in these areas.
Stephanie holds her A.B. and A.M. from the University of Chicago. Stephanie serves as the Scholarship Chair of CNFLHIMSS, on AHIMA’s Data Analytics Practice Council and recently completed a two-year term on the Advisory Board of the Association for Executives in Healthcare Information Security (AEHIS) of CHIME.
If you’d like to receive future HIM posts in your inbox, you can subscribe to future HIM Scene posts here.