IT Infrastructure Capability and Health Information Exchange: The Moderating Role of Electronic Medical Records’ Reach

  • Rogier van de WeteringEmail author
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing book series (LNBIP, volume 339)


This research investigates the hypothesized relationship between a hospital’s IT infrastructure capability and the degree to which hospital can exchange health information. Enhanced information exchange within and between hospitals is currently considered to be critical for modern hospital operations in the big data era. In this research, we build on the resource-based view of the firm to position the deployment and usage of IT capabilities as a unique, valuable, appropriable and difficult-to-imitate resource of value for hospitals. Following the resource-based view of the firm, this study argues IT is a strategic source of value for hospitals. Guided by our research model we test two related hypotheses using Partial least squares (PLS)-based Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) on a large-scale cross-sectional dataset of 1155 European hospitals. Results show that IT infrastructure capability is a crucial antecedent of health information exchange. Finally, we found that the degree to which hospitals deploy hospital-wide systems that electronically maintain and share health data and information, i.e., Electronic Medical Records, influences the strength of this particular relationship. These particular findings suggest that although IT investments in hospitals continue to grow, IT plans and strategies to enable health information exchange will require ongoing attention. Hence, our research provides valuable insights into how IT can be targetted and exploited to support capabilities in clinical practice. Specifically, we demonstrate the conditions under which hospitals can leverage their IT resources to enhance levels of patient and health information exchange within the hospital and beyond its boundaries.


IT infrastructure capability Health information exchange PLS-MGA IT capability The resource-based view of the firm (RBV) Hospitals 


  1. 1.
    Buntin, M.B., et al.: The benefits of health information technology: a review of the recent literature shows predominantly positive results. Health Aff. 30(3), 464–471 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Kohli, R., Tan, S.S.-L.: Electronic health records: how can IS researchers contribute to transforming healthcare? MIS Q. 40(3), 553–573 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Sheikh, A., Sood, H.S., Bates, D.W.: Leveraging health information technology to achieve the “triple aim” of healthcare reform. J. Am. Med. Inform. Assoc. 22(4), 849–856 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Hendrikx, H., et al.: Expectations and attitudes in eHealth: a survey among patients of Dutch private healthcare organizations. Int. J. Healthc. Manage. 6(4), 263–268 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Van de Wetering, R., Versendaal, J., Walraven, P.: Examining the relationship between a hospital’s IT infrastructure capability and digital capabilities: a resource-based perspective. In: The Proceedings of the Twenty-Fourth Americas Conference on Information Systems (AMCIS). AIS, New Orleans (2018)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Van de Wetering, R., Versendaal, J.: How a flexible collaboration infrastructure impacts healthcare information exchange. In: The Proceedings of the 31st Bled eConference Digital Transformation – Meeting the Challenges, Bled, Slovenia (2018)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Walker, J., et al.: The value of health care information exchange and interoperability. Health Aff. 24, W5 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Hersh, W.R., et al.: Outcomes from health information exchange: systematic review and future research needs. JMIR Med. Inform. 3(4), e39 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Vest, J.R., et al.: Challenges, alternatives, and paths to sustainability for health information exchange efforts. J. Med. Syst. 37(6), 9987 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Broadbent, M., Weill, P., Neo, B.-S.: Strategic context and patterns of IT infrastructure capability. J. Strateg. Inf. Syst. 8(2), 157–187 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Weill, P., Subramani, M., Broadbent, M.: Building IT infrastructure for strategic agility. MIT Sloan Manage. Rev. 44(1), 57 (2002)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Mikalef, P., Pateli, A., van de Wetering, R.: IT flexibility and competitive performance: the mediating role of IT-enabled dynamic capabilities. In: The Proceedings of the 24th European Conference on Information Systems (ECIS) (2016)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Van de Wetering, R., Mikalef, P., Pateli, A.: A strategic alignment model for IT flexibility and dynamic capabilities: toward an assessment tool. In: The Proceedings of the Twenty-Fifth European Conference on Information Systems (ECIS), Guimarães, Portugal (2017)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Van de Wetering, R., Mikalef, P., Helms, R.: Driving organizational sustainability-oriented innovation capabilities: a complex adaptive systems perspective. Curr. Opin. Environ. Sustainability 28, 71–79 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Henderson, J.C., Venkatraman, N.: Strategic alignment: leveraging information technology for transforming organisations. IBM Syst. J. 32(1), 4–16 (1993)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Melville, N., Kraemer, K., Gurbaxani, V.: Review: information technology and organizational performance: an integrative model of IT business value. MIS Q. 28(2), 283–322 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Wade, M., Hulland, J.: Review: the resource-based view and information systems research: review, extension, and suggestions for future research. MIS Q. 28(1), 107–142 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    El Sawy, O.A., Pavlou, P.A.: IT-enabled business capabilities for turbulent environments. MIS Q. Exec. 7(3), 139–150 (2008)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Barney, J.: Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. J. Manag. 17(1), 99–120 (1991)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Wernerfelt, B.: A resource-based view of the firm. Strateg. Manag. J. 5(2), 171–180 (1984)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Bharadwaj, A.S.: A resource-based perspective on information technology capability and firm performance: an empirical investigation. MIS Q. 24, 169–196 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Siegel, E.L., Reiner, B.: Filmless radiology at the Baltimore VA Medical Center: a 9 year retrospective. Comput. Med. Imaging Graph. 27, 101–109 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Van de Wetering, R., Batenburg, R.S.: A PACS maturity model: a systematic meta-analytic review on maturation and evolvability of PACS in the hospital enterprise. Int. J. Med. Inform. 78(2), 127–140 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Evans, D.C., Nichol, W.P., Perlin, J.B.: Effect of the implementation of an enterprise-wide electronic health record on productivity in the veterans health administration. Health Econ. Policy Law 1(2), 163–169 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Carvalho, J.V., et al.: A maturity model for hospital information systems. J. Bus. Res. 94, 388–399 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Sambamurthy, V., Bharadwaj, A., Grover, V.: Shaping agility through digital options: reconceptualizing the role of information technology in contemporary firms. MIS Q. 27, 237–263 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Gordon, S.R., Tarafdar, M.: How do a company’s information technology competences influence its ability to innovate? J. Enterp. Inf. Manage. 20(3), 271–290 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Kohli, R., Grover, V.: Business value of IT: an essay on expanding research directions to keep up with the times. J. Assoc. Inf. Syst. 9(1), 23 (2008)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Weill, P., Vitale, M.: What IT infrastructure capabilities are needed to implement e-business models? MIS Q. 1(1), 17 (2002)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Duncan, N.B.: Capturing flexibility of information technology infrastructure: a study of resource characteristics and their measure. J. Manage. Inf. Syst. 12, 37–57 (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Weill, P., Ross, J.: A matrixed approach to designing IT governance. MIT Sloan Manage. Rev. 46(2), 26 (2005)Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Broadbent, M., Weill, P.: Management by maxim: how business and IT managers can create IT infrastructures. MIT Sloan Manage. Rev. 38(3), 77 (1997)Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Konsynski, B.R., McFarlan, F.W.: Information partnerships–shared data, shared scale. Harvard Bus. Rev. 68(5), 114–120 (1990)Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Lotfi, Z., et al.: Information sharing in supply chain management. Procedia Technol. 11, 298–304 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Bagheri, S., et al.: Classification framework of knowledge transfer issues across value networks. In: Procedia CIRP, vol. 47, pp. 382–387 (2016)Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Patel, V., et al.: Physicians’ potential use and preferences related to health information exchange. Int. J. Med. Inform. 80(3), 171–180 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Overby, E., Bharadwaj, A., Sambamurthy, V.: Enterprise agility and the enabling role of information technology. Eur. J. Inf. Syst. 15(2), 120–131 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Ross, J.W., Beath, C.M., Goodhue, D.L.: Develop long-term competitiveness through IT assets. Sloan Manag. Rev. 38(1), 31 (1996)Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Jaana, M., Ward, M.M., Bahensky, J.A.: EMRs and clinical IS implementation in hospitals: a statewide survey. J. Rural Health 28(1), 34–43 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Sittig, D.F., Gonzalez, D., Singh, H.: Contingency planning for electronic health record-based care continuity: a survey of recommended practices. Int. J. Med. Inform. 83(11), 797–804 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    DesRoches, C.M., et al.: Adoption of electronic health records grows rapidly, but fewer than half of US hospitals had at least a basic system in 2012. Health Affairs (2013). Scholar
  42. 42.
    Park, S.Y., Lee, S.Y., Chen, Y.: The effects of EMR deployment on doctors’ work practices: a qualitative study in the emergency department of a teaching hospital. Int. J. Med. Inform. 81(3), 204–217 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Boonstra, A., Broekhuis, M.: Barriers to the acceptance of electronic medical records by physicians from systematic review to taxonomy and interventions. BMC Health Serv. Res. 10(1), 231 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Zhou, L., et al.: The relationship between electronic health record use and quality of care over time. J. Am. Med. Inform. Assoc. 16(4), 457–464 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Häyrinen, K., Saranto, K., Nykänen, P.: Definition, structure, content, use and impacts of electronic health records: a review of the research literature. Int. J. Med. Inform. 77(5), 291–304 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Podsakoff, P.M., et al.: Common method biases in behavioral research: a critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. J. Appl. Psychol. 88(5), 879 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Chin, W.: Issues and opinion on structural equation modeling. Manage. Inf. Syst. Q. 22(1), 7–16 (1998)Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    Wetzels, M., Odekerken-Schröder, G., Van Oppen, C.: Using PLS path modeling for assessing hierarchical construct models: guidelines and empirical illustration. MIS Q. 33(1), 177–195 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Hair Jr, J.F., et al.: A Primer on Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM). Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks (2016)Google Scholar
  50. 50.
    Reinartz, W., Haenlein, M., Henseler, J.: An empirical comparison of the efficacy of covariance-based and variance-based SEM. Int. J. Res. Mark. 26(4), 332–344 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Tenenhaus, M., et al.: PLS path modeling. Comput. Stat. Data Anal. 48(1), 159–205 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Ringle, C.M., Wende, S., Becker, J.-M.: SmartPLS 3. SmartPLS GmbH, Boenningstedt (2015).
  53. 53.
    Henseler, J., Ringle, C.M., Sarstedt, M.: A new criterion for assessing discriminant validity in variance-based structural equation modeling. J. Acad. Mark. Sci. 43(1), 115–135 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Henseler, J., Ringle, C., Sinkovics, R.: The use of partial least squares path modeling in international marketing. In: Advances in International Marketing, vol. 20, pp. 277–319 (2009)Google Scholar
  55. 55.
    Baron, R.M., Kenny, D.A.: The moderator–mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 51(6), 1173 (1986)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Chen, Y., et al.: IT capability and organizational performance: the roles of business process agility and environmental factors. Eur. J. Inf. Syst. 23(3), 326–342 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Faculty of Management, Science and TechnologyOpen University of the NetherlandsHeerlenThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations