Certification Programs for eHealth - eHealth2015

Certification Programs for eHealth –
Status Quo
Philipp URBAUERa, Juliane HERZOGa, Birgit POHNa, Mathias FORJANb and Stefan SAUERMANNb
a
Department of Information Engineering & Security, University of Applied Sciences Technikum Wien
b
Introduction
Department of Biomedical Engineering, University of Applied Sciences Technikum Wien
There are several ways of improving a system’s quality, but it is wellrecognized that education of the workforce plays a key role in improving
the quality of healthcare systems. The EU action plan concludes that it is
a key aim to foster “a more skilled workforce” [1]. A goal of the project
“eLearning4eHealth Network” at the University of Applied Sciences
Technikum Wien is the establishment of an international eHealth experts
group for coordinated development of educational programs and
certifications. As an early step, the objective of this paper is to identify
gaps regarding eHealth certifications, based on a literature research and
observations from the international workgroups EU-US Workforce
Development Workgroup and IHE Education.
Figure 4 shows the occurrence of thematic sub-areas in the regions EU, US and
globally. On a global level, Healthcare Information Systems and Management
related topics concerning eHealth as well as Informatics Basics and
Security/Safety are core areas within eHealth certification programs. For
certification programs in eHealth Medical Engineering, Nursing and Medical
content is of lower focus. Furthermore it can be identified that FML is
underrepresented in the EU in contrast to the US and the global level. Within
the subcategory Telemedicine there is a severe difference between EU/US and
globally. This is due to the high impact of Australian eHealth certification
programs, which have a large impact on this thematic area during research.
Methods
Initially certification in the context of this research “certification” was
defined as derived from [2], with the extension to person-certification:
“The provision by an independent body of written assurance (a
certificate) that the person in question meets specific requirements”.
Furthermore, on the basis of the interoperability levels defined in the
“eHealth European Interoperability Framework (eHealth EIF)” Study
Report [3, 4], three main thematic content categories were defined
within the eLearning4eHealth project, which need to be considered in
the
scope
of
eHealth:
Medicine,
Engineering,
Finance/Management/Law. These main categories were further divided
into subcategories as stated in Figure 1, 2 and 3. The target professions of
the certification programs are defined as Healthcare (medical staff),
Engineering and Management. An internet based literature research was
conducted and the findings were then categorized as described and the
statistical evaluation was worked out. The researched certification
programs are evaluated and discussed according to the following criteria
of certification program distribution, content type of the certificate,
national or international certificate validity, provided by academic or nonacademic institution, region (EU, US, global), target Group and
Figure 1. Occurrence of thematic sub-areas in certification
programs according to the professions within the EU
Figure 2. Occurrence of thematic sub-areas in certification
programs according to the professions within the US
Figure 3. Occurrence of thematic sub-areas in certification
programs according to the professions globally
Figure 4. Occurrence of thematic sub-areas in the regions EU, US
and globally
certification type.
Results
A total of 47 certification programs that meet the described criteria were
found during research. A list of the found programs can be found here [5].
Out of these 47 certifications 13 are offered within the EU, 23 in the US
and 11 in the rest of the world. The result show that certifications are
offered mainly for the engineering workforce, closely followed by the
healthcare workforce. In contrast to the EU and Global distribution there
is a significant higher consideration of the management workforce in the
US certification programs. Figure 1, 2 and 3 show the occurrence of the
thematic sub-areas in certification programs according to the three
defined content categories within the EU, the US and globally. Concerning
the distribution within the EU, percentage composition for the main
thematic areas is 66% Engineering, 18% Medicine and 16% FML.
Furthermore it is obvious that the thematic area of law in eHealth is not
covered at all and finance is only slightly covered. In contrast to the EU,
within the US the percentage composition of the main thematic areas is:
49% Engineering, 11% Medicine and 40% FML. There is a significant
difference between EU and US concerning FML, which mainly lies in the
sub thematic areas of law and finance. The subcategory Medical
Engineering is marginal in the EU as well as in the US. The global
percentage composition for the main thematic areas is: 57% Engineering,
14% Medicine and 29% FML.
Acknowledgement
This project is funded by the City of Vienna Municipal
department 23 “Economic Affairs, Labor and Statistics”
within the program “Internationalization of Teaching and
Science”.
Discussion
Offerings of certification programs in the EU are relatively difficult to identify, not
in the US where certification programs are very present in the academic area and
a lot of universities are offering certification programs. Furthermore during
research it was striking that the curricula of the trainings were much more
designed to meet the requirements of a broader target group. The most
significant difference between EU and US was the coverage of the FML domain
within the US eHealth certification programs. In the EU, FML’s occurrence in the
curricula is 16% in contrast to 40% in the US. In all three regional configurations
the importance of standardization and the connected sustainability seem to have
reached the mind, because topics like IHE, HL7, DICOM, LOINC, SNOMED CT etc.
are covered within many programs, although official certification programs seem
to be rare and those which were found during research do not seem to be
internationally coordinated and harmonized. Nevertheless processes are ongoing
and workgroups, like the EU-US workforce development workgroup, are working
on a harmonization of educational programs which can be the first steps for
adjusted and internationally coordinated certification programs in eHealth.
References
[1] COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT, THE COUNCIL, THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL
COMMITTEE AND THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS eHealth Action Plan 2012-2020 - Innovative healthcare for the 21st century,
http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CELEX:52012DC0736:EN:NOT, last access: 23.01.2014.
[2] International Organization for Standardizaion, Certification…, http://www.iso.org/iso/home/standards/certification.htm, last access:
24.01.2014.
[3]European Commission, Deloitte, eHealth European Interoperability Framework – ISA Work Program: Study Report, Publications Office
of the European Union, Luxembourg, 2013.
[4] European Commission, Deloitte, eHealth European Interoperability Framework – ISA Work Program: Overall Executive Summary,
Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg, 2013.
[5] List of Certification Programs, Literature Research_eLearning4eHealth Network(eHL) eHealth2014 available under:
https://healthyio.technikum-wien.at/oid/ListOfCertifications_eHL_eHealth2014.rar

Download Report