Professionalism of Information Management in Health Care: Development and Validation of the Construct and Its Measurement

BACKGROUND  Against the background of a steadily increasing degree of digitalization in health care, a professional information management (IM) is required to successfully plan, implement, and evaluate information technology (IT). At its core, IM has to ensure a high quality of health data and health information systems to support patient care. OBJECTIVES  The goal of the present study was to define what constitutes professional IM as a construct as well as to propose a reliable and valid measurement instrument. METHODS  To develop and validate the construct of professionalism of information management (PIM) and its measurement, a stepwise approach followed an established procedure from information systems and behavioral research. The procedure included an analysis of the pertaining literature and expert rounds on the construct and the instrument, two consecutive and comprehensive surveys at the national and international level, exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses as well as reliability and validity testing. RESULTS  Professionalism of information management was developed as a construct consisting of the three dimensions of strategic, tactical, and operational IM as well as of the regularity and cyclical phases of IM procedures as the two elements of professionalism. The PIM instrument operationalized the construct providing items that incorporated IM procedures along the three dimensions and cyclical phases. These procedures had to be evaluated against their degree of regularity in the instrument. The instrument proved to be reliable and valid in two consecutive measurement phases and across three countries. CONCLUSION  It can be concluded that professionalism of information management is a meaningful construct that can be operationalized in a scientifically rigorous manner. Both science and practice can benefit from these developments in terms of improved self-assessment, benchmarking capabilities, and eventually, obtaining a better understanding of health IT maturity.

[1]  Howard B. Lee,et al.  A First Course in Factor Analysis 2nd Ed , 1973 .

[2]  T. Brown,et al.  Confirmatory Factor Analysis for Applied Research , 2006 .

[3]  Evelyn H. Thrasher,et al.  An empirical examination of antecedents and consequences of IT governance in US hospitals , 2012, J. Inf. Technol..

[4]  R. Cattell.  The Scientific Use of Factor Analysis in Behavioral and Life Sciences , 2012 .

[5]  M. Miller,et al.  Sample Size Requirements for Structural Equation Models , 2013, Educational and psychological measurement.

[6]  Scott B. MacKenzie,et al.  Construct Measurement and Validation Procedures in MIS and Behavioral Research: Integrating New and Existing Techniques , 2011, MIS Q..

[7]  R. MacCallum,et al.  Sample size in factor analysis. , 1999 .

[8]  K Butler-Henderson,et al.  Health Information Management: Changing with Time. , 2017, Yearbook of medical informatics.

[9]  S. Arvanitis,et al.  Investigating the effects of ICT on innovation and performance of European hospitals: an exploratory study , 2014, The European Journal of Health Economics.

[10]  Mal Thatcher,et al.  IT Governance in Acute Healthcare: A Critical Review of Current Literature , 2013 .

[11]  Sara Arezki,et al.  Toward an IT governance maturity self-assessment model using EFQM and CobiT , 2018, ICGDA.

[12]  P. Pronovost,et al.  Drivers and Barriers in Health IT Adoption , 2012, Applied Clinical Informatics.

[13]  B. Wernerfelt,et al.  A Resource-Based View of the Firm , 1984 .

[14]  Rüdiger Zarnekow,et al.  Auf dem Weg zu einem produkt- und dienstleistungsorientierten IT-Management , 2003, HMD Prax. Wirtsch..

[15]  Rolph E. Anderson,et al.  Multivariate Data Analysis (7th ed. , 2009 .

[16]  George Ochieng Otieno,et al.  Measuring effectiveness of electronic medical records systems: Towards building a composite index for benchmarking hospitals , 2008, Int. J. Medical Informatics.

[17]  Gilad J. Kuperman.  Reflections on AMIA—looking to the future , 2013 .

[18]  Dorothy E. Leidner,et al.  An examination of the antecedents and consequences of organizational IT innovation in hospitals , 2010, J. Strateg. Inf. Syst..

[19]  Horst Grillmayer.  Best Practice in der Servicesteuerung – ITIL® und ISO 20000 , 2010 .

[20]  Guy Paré,et al.  Information technology sophistication in health care: an instrument validation study among Canadian hospitals , 2001, Int. J. Medical Informatics.

[21]  Alberto Maydeu-Olivares,et al.  Factor Analysis with Ordinal Indicators: A Monte Carlo Study Comparing DWLS and ULS Estimation , 2009 .

[22]  J. Barney.  Firm Resources and Sustained Competitive Advantage , 1991 .

[23]  René Riedl,et al.  On the Nature of Effective CIO/CEO Communication , 2017 .

[24]  Helmut Schlegel.  IT-Governance mit COBIT® – Methodenunterstutzung für das Management , 2010 .

[25]  Alexander Rossmann,et al.  The Impact of IT Governance on Firm Performance A Literature Review , 2017, PACIS.

[26]  Mark Shevlin,et al.  Alternative factor models and factorial invariance of the GHQ-12: a large sample analysis using confirmatory factor analysis. , 2005, Psychological assessment.

[27]  B. Tabachnick,et al.  Using multivariate statistics, 5th ed. , 2007 .

[28]  Ruediger Zarnekow,et al.  Integriertes Informationsmanagement: Vom Plan, Build, Run zum Source, Make, Deliver , 2004 .

[29]  Albert Maydeu-Olivares,et al.  Limited information estimation and testing of Thurstonian models for paired comparison data under multiple judgment sampling , 2001 .

[30]  Peter Chapman,et al.  Pacific Asia Conference on Information Systems ( PACIS ) 2015 IT Governance as a Higher Order Capability , 2017 .