Digital Orientation of Health Systems in the Post–COVID-19 “New Normal” in the United States: Cross-sectional Survey (Preprint)

Abstract

Almost all health systems have developed some form of customer-facing digital technologies and have worked to align these systems to their existing electronic health records to accommodate the surge in remote and virtual care deliveries during the COVID-19 pandemic. Others have developed analytics-driven decision-making capabilities. However, it is not clear how health systems in the United States are embracing digital technologies and there is a gap in health systems’ abilities to integrate workflows with expanding technologies to spur innovation and futuristic growth. There is a lack of reliable and reported estimates of the current and futuristic digital orientations of health systems. Periodic assessments will provide imperatives to policy formulation and align efforts to yield the transformative power of emerging digital technologies.

The aim of this study was to explore and examine differences in US health systems with respect to digital orientations in the post–COVID-19 “new normal” in 2021. Differences were assessed in four dimensions: (1) analytics-oriented digital technologies (AODT), (2) customer-oriented digital technologies (CODT), (3) growth and innovation–oriented digital technologies (GODT), and (4) futuristic and experimental digital technologies (FEDT). The former two dimensions are foundational to health systems’ digital orientation, whereas the latter two will prepare for future disruptions.

We surveyed a robust group of health system chief executive officers (CEOs) across the United States from February to March 2021. Among the 625 CEOs, 135 (22%) responded to our survey. We considered the above four broad digital technology orientations, which were ratified with expert consensus. Secondary data were collected from the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality Hospital Compendium, leading to a matched usable dataset of 124 health systems for analysis. We examined the relationship of adopting the four digital orientations to specific hospital characteristics and earlier reported factors as barriers or facilitators to technology adoption.

Health systems showed a lower level of CODT (mean 4.70) or GODT (mean 4.54) orientations compared with AODT (mean 5.03), and showed the lowest level of FEDT orientation (mean 4.31). The ordered logistic estimation results provided nuanced insights. Medium-sized (<i>P</i>&lt;.001) health systems, major teaching health systems (<i>P</i>&lt;.001), and systems with high-burden hospitals (<i>P</i>&lt;.001) appear to be doing worse with respect to AODT orientations, raising some concerns. Health systems of medium (<i>P</i>&lt;.001) and large (<i>P</i>=.02) sizes, major teaching health systems (<i>P</i>=.07), those with a high revenue (<i>P</i>=.05), and systems with high-burden hospitals (<i>P</i>&lt;.001) have less CODT orientation. Health systems in the midwest (<i>P</i>=.05) and southern (<i>P</i>=.04) states are more likely to adopt GODT, whereas high-revenue (<i>P</i>=.004) and investor-ownership (<i>P</i>=.01) health systems are deterred from GODT. Health systems of a medium size, and those that are in the midwest (<i>P</i>&lt;.001), south (<i>P</i>&lt;.001), and west (<i>P</i>=.01) are more adept to FEDT, whereas medium (<i>P</i>&lt;.001) and high-revenue (<i>P</i>&lt;.001) health systems, and those with a high discharge rate (<i>P</i>=.04) or high burden (<i>P</i>=.003, <i>P</i>=.005) have subdued FEDT orientations.

Almost all health systems have some current foundational digital technological orientations to glean intelligence or service delivery to customers, with some notable exceptions. Comparatively, fewer health systems have growth or futuristic digital orientations. The transformative power of digital technologies can only be leveraged by adopting futuristic digital technologies. Thus, the disparities across these orientations suggest that a holistic, consistent, and well-articulated direction across the United States remains elusive. Accordingly, we suggest that a policy strategy and financial incentives are necessary to spur a well-visioned and articulated digital orientation for all health systems across the United States. In the absence of such a policy to collectively leverage digital transformations, differences in care across the country will continue to be a concern.