Table 2.
Barriers to developing and implementing readmission models
| Domain | Barriers | Evidence* | Example† | Strategies to overcome barriers |
| Validation | Poor generalisability | Substantial | “[We are] questioning the generalization of the model to our population.” (33) |
|
| Low discriminative value | Limited | “[The biggest barrier is] having a good model to start with.” (48) | ||
| Features | SDH not included | Extensive | “We need to look well beyond SES, etc. to social support and healthcare beliefs and behaviors.” (2) |
|
| HAF not included | Substantial | “We need to look beyond academic status and for-profit status … to understand processes.” (2) | ||
| Timeframe | Timeframe not optimised | Limited | “30 days is probably too long to provide an accurate prediction.” (48) | |
| Data access | Barriers to data access | Extensive | “No matter how complex and good the model is, it is only as good as the data it has.” (20) |
|
| Inadequate interoperability | Substantial | “We need access to databases, especially linked primary and secondary care ones.” (9) | ||
| Insufficient data | Substantial | “We don’t have the necessary data and we don’t know what the necessary data even are.” (27) | ||
| Poor quality data | Substantial | “When we use routinely collected data in EHRs, the quality is less reliable.” (38) | ||
| Lacks current information | Limited | “If and when the factors change, we don’t know what they are - the case managers do.” (34) | ||
| Resources | Lacks personnel or expertise | Substantial | “[We lack] staffing resources for adequate capture of data and analytics of accumulated data.” (43) |
|
| Financial barriers | Substantial | “[There is] reluctance to make the necessary investments to access the EHR’s back end.” (1) | ||
| Vision | Competing priorities | Limited | “It [the model] is not a priority… they [the administration] have competing priorities. (14) |
|
| Lack of leadership | Very limited | “[There is] no operational leadership, so the model hasn’t been implemented.” (21) | ||
| Clinical relevance | Poor perceived relevance | Extensive | “Risk score doesn’t necessarily flag the patients in whom we can most usefully intervene.” (9) |
|
| Unclear usefulness | Substantial | “[Models must] fit into a workflow where an intervention can be made.” (16) | ||
| Poor perceived accuracy | Substantial | “I’ve found that it [the model] is not accurate at the individual patient level.” (6) | ||
| Workflow integration | Poor workflow integration | Extensive | “Getting it inserted into the EHR in a way that requires little provider effort is tough.” (48) |
|
| Alert fatigue | Very limited | “Clinicians get alert fatigue and stop paying attention to the results.” (33) | ||
| Maintenance | Antiquated model or interface | Limited | “Our commercial partner no longer supports the front end they developed [for our model].” (9) |
|
*Extensive evidence (≥8 mentions); substantial evidence (4–7 mentions); limited evidence (2–3 mentions), very limited evidence (1 mention).
†Numbers in parentheses refer to participant study ID.
EHR, electronic health record; HAF, healthcare-associated factors; IT, information technology; SDH, social determinants of health; SES, socioeconomic status.