Results, 2 nd Quarter Data Security. HIMSS Analytics ehealth TRENDBAROMETER Q2/2017

Transcription

1 Results, 2 nd Quarter 2017 Data Security 1

2 TABLE OF CONTENT Survey methodology page 3 Survey overview page 4 Results Overall page 5 Protection of medical data by government page 7 Protection of medical data in different environments page 8 Protection of medical data by software vendors page 10 Electronic health information exchange security page 11 Role model for health information exchange and continuity of care page 13 Hospital Information System / Electronic Medical Record System purchase plans page 14 Hospital Information System / Electronic Medical Record System sales opportunities page 15 Business expectations page 16 2

3 HIMSS ANALYTICS WHO WE ARE HIMSS Analytics in Europe provides healthcare organisations, governments and industry with extensive data resources and services about the adoption and use of healthcare IT in Europe. HIMSS Analytics offerings include database and advisory solutions which encompass market research, IT adoption benchmarking, IT Maturity Models for topics like Electronic Medical Records or Continuity of Care. These offerings are designed to support Management and CIOs, IT Executives and Clinicians from across Europe to compare and measure their progress. EHEALTH TRENDBAROMETER METHODOLOGY Objectives Study design Target audience and participants o Continuous evaluation of trends and issues in the European ehealth sector: 2 4 survey waves per year, with both varying and recurring topics o Provide insights into current and desired states of ehealth in Europe o Enable discussions within the European ehealth community o Structured quantitative online survey o Quick completion (time-to-complete is < 5 min) o Survey language(s): English, German o Participation via personal invitation or via public link on and other channels Key audience: ehealth professionals from several European countries, especially: o IT staff, administrative staff, and clinicians from health facilities (e.g. CIO s, CEO s, Physicians, Nurses) o Professionals from health-it related software and consulting companies o Professionals from other ehealth related sectors (e.g. health authorities, research, journalism) Number of participants: approx per survey wave Survey period o Typical field time: Approx. 2 months o Specific field time for Data Security Trend Barometer: March April 2017 Access all ehealth Trend Barometers here: 3

4 SURVEY QUESTIONS Main Topic: Data Security 1. What type of organisation are you working for? 2. How satisfied are you with the regulation put in force by your national government in order to protect your medical data? 3. In your role as a patient, how well protected do you see your personal medical data in the following environments? 4. As a healthcare provider, how satisfied are you with the level of data security offered by software vendors? 5. If you look at the health system in your country, how well prepared is it in order to enable secure electronic health information exchange between different types of healthcare providers? 6. In your opinion, which country do you consider being a role model for advanced health information exchange and continuity of care? 7. How likely is it that your organisation will purchase a new Hospital Information System / Electronic Medical Record System from a different vendor within the next months (i.e. not the one you are currently using)? 8. In your opinion, which of the following countries provide the best sales opportunities for HIS/EMR vendors in Europe over the next months? 9. How will the environment for ehealth innovation and investment in your country develop over the next 12 months? 4

5 KEY FINDINGS ehealth Business climate: The business trend for ehealth continues to be positive in all surveyed countries, despite a slight decrease over the last months. 5 Lessons on data security and 1 recommendation for EMR vendors Lesson 1: Medical data are perceived to be relatively well protected, but not all of it. ehealth professionals are not particularly concerned about the protection of medical data, neither in terms of national regulation nor with regards to measures used by different healthcare providers. But there are a few exceptions, e.g. security from wellness and fitness applications or by home and social care providers. Lesson 2: Europe is not equal when it comes to perceived levels of data security. The Nordics are more satisfied than most other European countries/regions, especially with regard to the safety of their own personal medical data and the appropriateness of data security efforts by public hospitals and health authorities. On the other end of the scale is where data security concerns are stronger. Lesson 3: You can trust your software vendor s data security efforts, but they won t necessarily trust you (until you buy more). Healthcare employees are, by and large, rather satisfied with the data security measures put in force by software vendors. But software vendors themselves are less satisfied with the way healthcare providers protect medical data. SW vendors might want to sell additional products offering higher levels of security (which care providers cannot afford) or they might have a higher awareness (than healthcare employees) about potential gaps in their products. Lesson 4: (More) financial incentives are needed to improve the security of medical data. It s the financials, stupid! ehealth professionals do not blame legislation, IT infrastructure, technical standards, software vendors, not even the patients to be a roadblock for secure Health Information Exchange (HIE) with external organisations. They call for financial incentives to stimulate and push secure HIE. Lesson 5: Denmark is the role model for secure Health Information Exchange and Continuity of Care. ehealth professionals across Europe see the Danish Health System as the most advanced one regarding secure HIE. With some distance Estonia and Sweden follow on rank 2 and 3. EMR Vendor Recommendation: Find new clients in the UK and Nordics, try to retain existing clients in other European countries. Healthcare providers in the Nordic countries expect most EMR replacements (to different vendors) over the next 1-2 years. Software vendors themselves feel that the UK is the most attractive market for EMR and HIS for that same timeframe. 5

6 SAMPLE DISTRIBUTION SURVEY PARTICIPANTS Strong participation from D-A-CH, Netherlands, Nordics, UK and Spain. The survey attracts a broad range of ehealth professionals: only 40% are responsible for IT (in health facilities or for SW vendors), another 60% work as clinicians, in governance, consulting or other areas. Geographic distribution Type of organisation Respondent s occupation Austria Switzerland Netherlands Nordic countries UK Spain Other 17% 13% 9% 9% 10% n=383 16% 16% 10% Health facility IT Software vendor Other 57% IT officers Physicians Governance Nursing staff Other 46% 19% 17% 5% 13% Other: Pharmacy, research, IT, marketing Country n 50 Austria 37 Switzerland 60 Netherlands 40 Denmark 17 Finland 13 Norway 17 Sweden 16 United Kingdom 33 Spain 34 Other* Countries or regions with more than 30 participants are shown individually. * Other respondents are from: Italy, Belgium, Estonia, USA, Portugal, France 31% 12% Health Authority Academic Sector Consulting Research Journalism & PR Other 27% 19% 17% 5% 22% 10% Other: IT hardware vendor, pharmaceutical company, governmental organisation 6

7 average RESULTS NATIONAL DATA PROTECTION REGULATION Most ehealth professionals, no matter if they work in health facilities or for software vendors, are neither particularly satisfied nor unsatisfied with the regulation of medical data protection in their country. As such, a call for governmental action doesn t seem urgent. How satisfied are you with the regulation put in force by your national government in order to protect your medical data? [Mean values; scale from 1 very unsatisfied to 5 very satisfied ; without other organisations] n = 371 Health facility n = 214 Software vendor n = Austria 3.4 Switzerland 3.4 Netherlands Nordics 3.4 UK Spain 4.2 unsatisfied satisfied unsatisfied satisfied unsatisfied satisfied 7 Valid responses by country: : n=48; Austria: n=35; Switzerland: n=35; Netherlands: n=40; Nordic Countries: n=62; UK: n=32; Spain: n=34

8 average 3.1 RESULTS DATA PROTECTION IN DIFFERENT ENVIRONMENTS 1/2 Medical data are perceived to be protected relatively well in most health environments. An exception is the wellness and fitness application environment, where data protection is perceived to be unsatisfactory. Home and social care organisations are also rated below average. Hospitals, which topped the headlines during recent cyber attacks, receive some of the best ratings. Professionals working for software vendors are generally more sceptical than people working in health facilities (do they know the gaps?). In your role as a patient, how well protected do you see your personal medical data in the following environments? [Mean values; scale from 1 very unsafe to 5 very safe ; without other organisations] satisfied n = Health facility n = Software vendor n = unsatisfied General Public Hospitals Private Hospitals Rehabilitation Practioners and Facilities Small Day Clinics Home and Social Care Organisations Health Insurance Organisations Governmental Organisations Wellness and Fitness Application Providers 8

9 average 3.1 RESULTS DATA PROTECTION IN DIFFERENT ENVIRONMENTS 2/2 The perception of how well data are protected in different health environments varies by country. This perception is mostly in line with the findings from national medical data security regulation, i.e. ehealth professionals from the Nordic countries feel more safe about their personal medical data than Germans. In your role as a patient, how well protected do you see your personal medical data in the following environments? [Mean values; scale from 1 very unsafe to 5 very safe ; without other countries] (All respondents) Austria Switzerland Netherlands Nordics UK Spain General Practitioners and Small Day Clinics n = 357 Public Hospitals n = 372 Private Hospitals n = 311 Rehabilitation Facilities n = 291 Home and Social Care Organisations n = 316 Health Insurance Organisations n = 314 Governmental Organisations n = 354 Wellness and Fitness Application Providers n = Valid responses by country: : n= 41-48; Austria: n= 29-37; Switzerland: n= 49-57; Netherlands: n= 28-38; Nordics: n= 40-62; UK: n= 17-33; Spain: n= 26-33

10 average RESULTS DATA PROTECTION BY SOFTWARE VENDORS From the perspective of healthcare employees, data security measures put in force by software vendors are also perceived to be, by and large, acceptable. This is in line with previous findings, i.e. efforts made through national regulation or by different care settings/stakeholders. Healthcare employees in the UK are most satisfied with their vendors, their German peers are (again) the most critical. As a healthcare provider, how satisfied are you with the level of data security offered by software vendors? [Mean values; scale from 1 very unsatisfied to 5 very satisfied ; only participants who are working in a health facility; without other countries] satisfied unsatisfied n = 214 n = 28 Austria n = 27 Switzerland n = 37 Netherlands n = 18 Nordics n = 30 UK n = 22 Spain n = 19 Other n = 33 10

11 average RESULTS SECURE HEALTH INFO EXCHANGE ENABLEMENT 1/2 It s the financials, stupid! ehealth professionals do not blame legislation, nor IT infrastructure, nor technical standards, nor software vendors, and not even the patients to be a roadblock for secure Health Information Exchange (HIE) with external organisations. They call for financial incentives to stimulate and push secure HIE. In terms of self-perception healthcare employees are self-critical: Clinicians should be more flexible and motivated to embrace HIE. SW vendor employees perceive themselves to be particularly flexible, which is not as much the case from an external perspective. If you look at the health system in your country, how well prepared is it in order to enable secure electronic health information exchange between different types of healthcare providers? [Mean values; scale from 1 flop to 5 top ; without other organisations] Top n = Health care facility n = IT software vendor n = 41-44! Flop Data Privacy Legislation IT Infrastructure Financial Incentives Technical Standards Flexibility and Willingness of Clinical Staff Flexibility and Willingness of Patients Flexibility and Willingness of Software Vendors 11

12 average RESULTS SECURE HEALTH INFO EXCHANGE ENABLEMENT 2/2 More financial incentives are demanded across all countries, but particularly in and Austria (although Austrians already have a nationwide health record infrastructure (ELGA) in place). In, ehealth professionals also have a negative perception of their Health-IT Infrastructure and Technical Standards. This is a likely reaction caused by multiple delays with the national EHR platform. ehealth Professionals from the Nordics and Spain see themselves (mostly) on the right track. If you look at the health system in your country, how well prepared is it in order to enable secure electronic health information exchange between different types of healthcare providers? [Mean values; scale from 1 flop to 5 top ; without other countries; without answer option other ] (All respondents) Austria Switzerland Netherlands Nordics UK Spain Data Privacy Legislation n = 362 IT Infrastructure n = 368 Financial Incentives n = 329 Technical Standards n = 367 Flexibility and Willingness of Clinical Staff n = 370 Flexibility and Willingness of Patients n = 361 Flexibility and Willingness of SW Vendors n = Valid responses by country: : n= 44-47; Austria: n= 31-36; Switzerland: n= 55-59; Netherlands: n= 33-38; Nordics: n= 50-63; UK: n= 27-33; Spain: n= 31-34

13 Leading Country DK RESULTS ROLE MODEL COUNTRY FOR CONTINUITY OF CARE Overall, Denmark is perceived to be the leading country for continuity of care and HIE. One in four ehealth professionals puts the Danes on top. With some distance Estonia and Sweden follow on rank 2 and 3. This order changes slightly from country to country. Dutch and Spanish ehealth professionals perceive their own country to be leading. Spain in particular seems to have an issue with external perception, hardly any respondent from outside Spain values their achievements. and Belgium are trailing behind. In your opinion, which country do you consider being a role model for advanced health information exchange and continuity of care? [Responses in percent; labels only shown when >5%] Denmark Estonia Sweden Netherlands Austria Finland Norway United Kingdom Switzerland Spain Belgium Other* n = n = Austria n = Switzerland n = Netherlands n = Nordics n = UK n = Spain n = * other country: USA, France, Iceland, Andorra 13

14 Most active market NORDICS RESULTS PURCHASE PLANS FOR HIS/EMRs EMR/HIS vendors are likely to find best market opportunities in the Nordic countries, where healthcare professionals indicated that their organisation is likely to purchase a new system from a different vendor over the next 1-2 years. The lower values in other countries might be an indicator that hospitals there are more loyal to their current vendor or find it more difficult to switch to a different one. How likely is it that your organisation will purchase a new Hospital Information System / Electronic Medical Record System from a different vendor within the next months (i.e. not the one you are currently using)? [only participants who are working in a health facility; without other countries] n = 215 n = 29 Austria n = 26 Schwitzerland Netherlands n = 39 n = 18 Nordics n = 30 UK n = 21 Spain n = 18 likely Likely Neither likely nor unlikely 14% 10% 8% 18% 7% 8% 13% 3% 15% 10% 7% 21% 12% 21% 18% 11% 17% 11% 27% 17% 17% 19% 10% 5% 14% 28% 17% Unlikely unlikely 47% 59% 58% 51% 61% 17% 23% 52% 56% Means

15 Best opportunities UK RESULTS SALES OPPORTUNITIES FOR HIS/EMRs The UK is the land of milk and honey for HIS/EMR sales, at least from the view of software vendor employees. Denmark, Sweden and Switzerland, albeit much smaller, are ranked on the same level as. In your opinion, which of the following countries provide the best sales opportunities for HIS/EMR vendors in Europe over the next months? [only participants working for a software vendor; n = 31] 29% 13% 13% 13% 13% 6% 3% 3% 3% 3% United Kingdom Denmark Sweden Switzerland Finland Austria Belgium Norway Spain 15

16 Balance of business expectations* RESULTS BUSINESS EXPECTATIONS Business prospects for the ehealth sector continue to be very positive, albeit -100 at a slightly lower level than at +100 the end of While to be digested with caution (low response rate) ehealth professionals from Finland are particularly optimistic (92% expect an improvement). From a general perspective: How will the environment for ehealth innovation and investment in your country develop over the next 12 months? [Score for Balance of business expectations = (percentage improve percentage worse )*100] positive expectations Q Q Q Q Q negative expectations 2017 Q2 Results by country (2017 Q2) worse steady improve N 2% 60% 38% 50 Austria 11% 62% 27% 37 Switzerland 7% 33% 60% 60 Netherlands 5% 30% 65% 40 Belgium 0% 0% 10% 7 Denmark 6% 29% 65% 17 Norway 6% 18% 76% 17 Sweden 0% 31% 69% 16 Finland 0% 8% 92% 13 United Kingdom 12% 39% 48% 33 Italy 13% 56% 31% 16 Spain 3% 44% 53% 34 All countries 6% 40% 54% 369 DACH Nordics Netherlands UK All countries 16

17 Thank you for your participation! HIMSS Analytics Office Leipzig Schwägrichenstraße Leipzig Join the European ehealth community panel research@himssanalytics.eu 17