J Korean Med Assoc.  2014 May;57(5):386-390. 10.5124/jkma.2014.57.5.386.

Global trends in the use of nationwide big data for solving healthcare problems

• Bae JM

• KMID: 2194880
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.5124/jkma.2014.57.5.386

Abstract

While Korea had the highest rate of increase in per capita health expenditures from 1997 to 2007 among The Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) countries, it is necessary in all countries to establish sustainable health care systems that efficiently use the existing effective treatment methods. For dealing with the overwhelming health care crisis, the European Union and the United States (US) have launched Health Technology Assessment (HTA) and Comparative Effectiveness Research (CER) programs, respectively. Further, the Federal Coordinating Council for Comparative Effectiveness Research in US has considered the development of the CER data infrastructure to be the primary investment needed in order to reform the national health care system. The main reason is that investment in data infrastructure can potentially generate significant additional investment in CER. In addition, the Council stressed the need for coordination between CER and health information technology through a distributed network of electronic health records. These directions and decisions on driving CER in the US may provide an invaluable lesson on solving some healthcare problems in Korea. However, barriers to the potential contribution of the existing databases to CER must be overcome, including interoperability, privacy protection and confidentiality, and active participation of the holders of the related databases.

Keyword

Comparative effectiveness research; Biomedical technology; Electronic health records; Medical record linkage; Computerized medical records systems

MeSH Terms

Biomedical Technology
Comparative Effectiveness Research
Confidentiality
Delivery of Health Care*
Electronic Health Records
European Union
Health Expenditures
Investments
Korea
Medical Informatics
Medical Record Linkage
Medical Records Systems, Computerized
Privacy
United States

Figure

• 

  Figure 1 The high level office setting (OS) investment priorities recommended by the Congress of USA. CER, Comparative Effective Research. From Figure 3 in Federal Coordinating Council for Comparative Effectiveness Research. Report to the president and the congress [Internet]. Washington, DC: Department of Health and Human Services; 2009 [12].

Reference

1. Beaglehole R, Bonita R, Horton R, Adams C, Alleyne G, Asaria P, Baugh V, Bekedam H, Billo N, Casswell S, Cecchini M, Colagiuri R, Colagiuri S, Collins T, Ebrahim S, Engelgau M, Galea G, Gaziano T, Geneau R, Haines A, Hospedales J, Jha P, Keeling A, Leeder S, Lincoln P, McKee M, Mackay J, Magnusson R, Moodie R, Mwatsama M, Nishtar S, Norrving B, Patterson D, Piot P, Ralston J, Rani M, Reddy KS, Sassi F, Sheron N, Stuckler D, Suh I, Torode J, Varghese C, Watt J. Lancet NCD Action Group. NCD Alliance. Priority actions for the non-communicable disease crisis. Lancet. 2011; 377:1438–1447.

2. Oh IH, Yoon SJ, Kim EJ. The burden of disease in Korea. J Korean Med Assoc. 2011; 54:646–652.

3. Beaglehole R, Bonita R, Horton R, Ezzati M, Bhala N, Amuyunzu-Nyamongo M, Mwatsama M, Reddy KS. Measuring progress on NCDs: one goal and five targets. Lancet. 2012; 380:1283–1285.

4. Ahn YO. Concepts and necessity of preventive medical services for the 21st century. J Korean Med Assoc. 2011; 54:246–249.

5. Manchikanti L, Falco FJ, Boswell MV, Hirsch JA. Facts, fallacies, and politics of comparative effectiveness research: Part I. Basic considerations. Pain Physician. 2010; 13:E23–E54.

6. Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development. Health at a glance 2009: OECD indicators (Korean version). Seoul: OECD/Korea Policy Centre, Korea;2010. cited 2014 Mar 3. Available from: http://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/social-issues-migration-health/health-at-a-glance-2009_9789264105133-ko;jsessionid=6qp8q6ndek529.x-oecd-live-02.

7. Bae JM, Park BJ, Ahn YO. Perspectives of clinical epidemiology in Korea. J Korean Med Assoc. 2013; 56:718–723.

8. Congress of the United States Congressional Budget Office. Research on the comparative effectiveness of medical treatments. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press;2007.

9. National Evidence-based Healthcare Collaborating Agency. Strategies and direction of comparative effectiveness research in Korea [Internet]. Seoul: National Evidence-based Healthcare Collaborating Agency;2012. cited 2014 Mar 3. Available from: http://www.neca.re.kr/center/researcher/report_view.jsp?boardNo=GA&seq=69&q=63706167653d3226626f6172644e6f3d474126736561726368436f6c3d2673656172636856616c3d2673656172636853596561723d2673656172636845596561723d.

10. Chalkidou K, Tunis S, Lopert R, Rochaix L, Sawicki PT, Nasser M, Xerri B. Comparative effectiveness research and evidence-based health policy: experience from four countries. Milbank Q. 2009; 87:339–367.

11. Keckley PH, Coughlin S, Gupta S, Vasquez C. Comparative effectiveness research in the United States: update and implications [Internet]. Washington, DC: Deloitte Center for Health Solutions;2011. cited 2014 Mar 3. Available from: https://www.deloitte.com/assets/Dcom-UnitedStates/Local%20Assets/Documents/Health%20Reform%20Issues%20Briefs/US_CHS_ComparativeEffectivenessResearchintheUS_062711.pdf.

12. Federal Coordinating Council for Comparative Effectiveness Research. Report to the president and the congress [Internet]. Washington, DC: Department of Health and Human Services;2009. cited 2014 Mar 3. Available from: http://www.tuftsctsi.org/~/media/Files/CTSI/Library%20Files/FCC%20for%20CER%20Rpt%20to%20Pres%20and%20Congress_063009.ashx.

13. Pace WD, Cifuentes M, Valuck RJ, Staton EW, Brandt EC, West DR. An electronic practice-based network for observational comparative effectiveness research. Ann Intern Med. 2009; 151:338–340.

14. Holve E, Segal C, Lopez MH, Rein A, Johnson BH. The Electronic Data Methods (EDM) forum for comparative effectiveness research (CER). Med Care. 2012; 50:Suppl. S7–S10.

15. Williams RL, Shelley BM, Sussman AL. RIOS Net clinicians. The marriage of community-based participatory research and practice-based research networks: can it work? A Research Involving Outpatient Settings Network (RIOS Net) study. J Am Board Fam Med. 2009; 22:428–435.

16. Brown AE, Pavlik VN. Patient-centered research happens in practice-based research networks. J Am Board Fam Med. 2013; 26:481–483.

17. Committee on Comparative Effectiveness Research. Initial national priorities for comparative effective research. Washington, DC: National Academies Press;2009.

18. Institute of Medicine. The Health Data Initiative [Internet]. Washington, DC: Institute of Medicine;c2014. cited 2014 Mar 3. Available from: http://www.iom.edu/Activities/PublicHealth/HealthData/.

19. Olsen LA, Grossman C, McGinnis JM. Institute of Medicine (U.S.) Roundtable on Value & Science-Driven Health Care. Learning what works: infrastructure required for comparative effectiveness research: workshop summary. Washington, DC: National Academies Press;2011.

20. Institute of Medicine. Discussion framework for clinical trial data sharing: guiding principles, elements, and activities. Washington, DC: National Academies Press;2014.

21. Gluck ME. Is health information technology associated with patient safety in the United States? Find Brief. 2009; 12:1–3.

22. Hollar DW. Progress along developmental tracks for electronic health records implementation in the United States. Health Res Policy Syst. 2009; 7:3.

23. Williams RL, McPherson L, Kong A, Skipper B, Weller N. PRIME Net clinicians. Internet-based training in a practice-based research network consortium: a report from the Primary Care Multiethnic Network (PRIME Net). J Am Board Fam Med. 2009; 22:446–452.

24. Sicotte C, Pare G, Moreault MP, Lemay A, Valiquette L, Barkun J. Replacing an inpatient electronic medical record. Lessons learned from user satisfaction with the former system. Methods Inf Med. 2009; 48:92–100.

25. Boddy D, King G, Clark JS, Heaney D, Mair F. The influence of context and process when implementing e-health. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2009; 9:9.

26. Song MH, Park DK, Lee YH. Medical informatics methods for the clinical evidence extraction. J Korean Med Assoc. 2012; 55:741–747.

27. Park RW. A clinical research strategy using longitudinal observational data in the post-electronic health records era. J Korean Med Assoc. 2012; 55:711–719.

28. Lee LM, Gostin LO. Ethical collection, storage, and use of public health data: a proposal for a national privacy protection. JAMA. 2009; 302:82–84.

29. Yoo SH, Lee J, Lee K, Lee I, Bae JM. Ethical principles and practice guidelines concerning the usage of public database for medical researches. J Korean Med Assoc. 2013; 56:1031–1038.

30. Balkrishnan R, Chang J, Patel I, Yang F, Merajver SD. Global comparative healthcare effectiveness research: evaluating sustainable programmes in low & middle resource settings. Indian J Med Res. 2013; 137:494–501.