European Health IT Leaders Look to Denmark and Finland as Models for EHR Interoperability and Patient Access, Black Book Survey Reveals
Ahead of Next Week's HIMSS 25 Europe in Paris, Attendees Look to Top Interoperability Vendors for Solutions
PARIS, FRANCE / ACCESS Newswire / June 7, 2025 / Black Book Market Research today released findings from its latest survey highlighting the influence of Denmark and Finland on Electronic Health Record (EHR) interoperability and patient access initiatives across Europe. Conducted among 312 healthcare IT leaders from 8 higher tech-adoption European nations, the study underscores the strategic shift among healthcare organizations to emulate the advanced digital health ecosystems of these two Nordic frontrunners.
According to the survey, 94% of respondents identified Denmark's comprehensive national health portal, Sundhed.dk, as a model for delivering centralized patient records and seamless data exchange. Finland's Kanta platform similarly emerged as a key inspiration, cited by 90% of healthcare executives for its robust nationwide interoperability and extensive patient record accessibility.
The survey also recognized standout EHR technology vendors contributing significantly to these Nordic success stories. Epic Systems, utilized by major hospitals and health regions in Denmark, was ranked highly for its interoperability performance and scalability across diverse clinical environments. TietoEVRY and CGI, prominent in the Finnish healthcare market, received notable recognition for their roles in facilitating robust connectivity and patient-centric record management through Finland's Kanta service.
The report also highlighted Germany and Italy as the European nations with high EHR adoption rates yet struggling most significantly with interoperability and patient record access. Survey respondents identified primary reasons for these challenges as fragmented regional systems, lack of centralized governance, varying data standards, and insufficient investment in integrated digital health infrastructure. Providers in these countries reported an average interoperability satisfaction score of just 18%, significantly lower than Nordic benchmarks. According to respondents, responsibility for these challenges is shared: 86% cited government policy and funding issues, 21% pointed to vendor limitations in offering interoperable solutions, and 80% attributed the problems to provider reluctance or inability to implement cohesive digital strategies.
'European IT leaders are closely analyzing the strategic frameworks, governance structures, and advanced technology models pioneered by Denmark and Finland,' said Douglas Brown, founder of Black Book Market Research. 'Their proven success with interoperability standards, comprehensive EHR adoption, and seamless data integration is inspiring other European health systems to accelerate their digital transformations with secure data exchange and patient-centric solutions.'
Further survey insights highlighted specific adoption trends:
91% of surveyed executives emphasized the importance of centralized national infrastructures to enable seamless EHR integration.
84% noted the critical role of stringent data standardization, including widespread adoption of HL7 FHIR standards.
60% of respondents are now accelerating plans for patient-access portals inspired by the Danish and Finnish approaches.
'Denmark and Finland offer powerful examples of how cohesive digital health strategies improve patient care and operational efficiency,' added Brown. 'Vendors succeeding in these markets are proving vital to replicating these results throughout Europe.'
Top Client-Rated Interoperability Solutions Vendors at HIMSS 25 EU
Attendees of HIMSS25 Europe in Paris are encouraged to visit four leading interoperability vendors highly rated in recent Black Book IT user surveys across Europe. These vendors are recognized for their advanced solutions driving seamless connectivity, comprehensive data integration, and patient-centric interoperability. Each demonstrates notable success in enabling secure data exchange, facilitating real-time patient information access, and empowering healthcare organizations to optimize patient outcomes and operational efficiency. Visitors can expect compelling demonstrations highlighting the robust capabilities and proven successes these vendors have achieved within Europe's most digitally advanced healthcare environments:
About Black Book Market Research
Black Book Market Research is a leading global independent research firm providing unbiased, client-driven evaluations of healthcare technology and services. Black Book rankings are based entirely on user feedback and customer satisfaction data, offering strategic insights to healthcare providers, payers, vendors, and investors.
For more information, visit www.blackbookmarketresearch.com.
Contact InformationPress Office 8008637590
SOURCE: Black Book Research
press release
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
NHS ‘to rely on migrants' as Government cuts British nurse training
The Government has cut funding for nursing courses in a move that risks undermining its pledge to end the NHS's reliance on foreign workers. Ministers have quietly frozen grants that are paid to universities to help them cover the higher costs of training medical workers. Critics reacted by warning that the move, which represents a real-terms cut, would 'worsen an already difficult situation' in the sector and 'leave us more reliant' on imported labour. It will also prompt fears of further cuts down the line, with education set to be one of the losers in Rachel Reeves's spending review this week. Universities are already struggling to keep nursing courses afloat, with research showing that many are cutting lecturer jobs to save cash. In last year's manifesto, Labour pledged to 'end the long-term reliance on overseas workers' with a 'workforce and training plan' for the NHS. However, Bridget Phillipson, the Education Secretary, has now frozen grants which are paid to universities to cover the extra costs of running medical courses. Those include courses for nursing, midwifery and 'allied health professionals' such as paramedics, radiographers and occupational therapists. In a letter to the Office for Students, she said the per-student funding levels should be kept the same as last year, representing a real-terms cut. That is part of an overall reduction of £108 million in the cash that has been made available for the Strategic Priorities Grant this year. Patricia Marquis, the executive director for the Royal College of Nursing in England, said nursing courses were already under threat from the 'financial crisis' at universities. 'A freeze in per student funding, effectively a real-terms cut, could make a bad situation worse, resulting in not only more job losses, but impacting the very financial viability of nursing courses,' she warned. 'University courses are the single biggest route into the profession, and this would be a disaster. Additional funding should be released to protect nursing courses in response to rising costs.' Vivienne Stern, the chief executive of Universities UK, also warned that the cuts to the grant risked 'worsening an already difficult situation'. She said that the move, combined with a recent decision to slash cash for apprenticeships, would have a 'detrimental impact on training our healthcare workforce'. 'Universities are committed to delivering what this country needs, including a strong and sustainable NHS workforce, and are crucial to training talent,' she said. 'We can't create a future-proof NHS workforce without long-term, sustained investment from the government.' Ms Phillipson said in her letter to the OfS that universities should prioritise funding for nursing courses as 'a strategically important subject'. She targeted grants for other courses and in particular media studies and journalism, which have been derided by some as 'Mickey Mouse' degrees. But despite that, it appears there was still only enough money in the pot for her to restrict the hit to medical courses to a real-terms cut. Laura Trott, the shadow education secretary, said the move was 'yet more evidence that Labour aren't serious about cutting immigration'. 'At a time when we should be training more British people to become nurses, they've cut teaching grants for universities and scrapped almost all higher-level apprenticeships, leaving an 11,000 shortfall in the NHS workforce plan,' she said. 'These decisions will leave us more reliant on foreign labour, when we should be training British people for British jobs.' The Department for Education is facing steep real-terms cuts to its budget when the Chancellor unveils her spending review on Wednesday. She will set out the annual funding totals that all Whitehall departments receive from next year until almost the end of the decade. Most are expecting to see their budgets squeezed to free up more cash for health and defence, which will be the two big winners. Within education, the schools budget is ring-fenced, meaning it cannot be cut. Early years provision, meanwhile, is a flagship Labour policy with the party pledging to fund the creation of 100,000 new nursery places. That means that higher education, including universities and apprenticeships, is expected to bear the brunt of the cuts imposed on the department. A Government spokesman said: 'We hugely value the work of talented nurses and midwives which is why we have prioritised Strategic Priorities Grant funding for important, high-cost courses, including nursing and midwifery, that are vital for economic growth and our Plan for Change. 'The dire situation we inherited has meant this Government must take tough decisions to put universities on a firmer financial footing and we're continuing to support them, including by increasing the amount they can charge in tuition fees. 'We are rebuilding the NHS for the benefit of patient and staff, and ensuring nursing remains an attractive career choice, including by unveiling a refreshed workforce plan to ensure we have the right staff in the right place so the NHS can be there for everyone.' Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.
Medscape
4 hours ago
- Medscape
Limited Survival Benefit With Expanded Kidney Donor Criteria
VIENNA — The use of expanded-criteria donors for kidney transplantation in older and high-risk recipients did not provide the same survival benefit as the use of standard donors, according to an analysis of data from more than 64,000 individuals in the European Renal Association (ERA) Registry, using target trial emulation. 'When determining who is a suitable transplant candidate, we shouldn't only focus on the patient alone, because the outcomes will also depend on donor quality,' said study presenter Rachel Hellemans, MD, PhD, a nephrologist at Antwerp University Hospital, Belgium. 'Of course, ideally, we would like to give a transplant to everyone, but shortage is a reality,' she continued. The possibilities for older patients to receive a standard-criteria donor kidney depend on local allocation systems and waiting times. Waiting an extended period for a transplant carries the risk of clinical deterioration, Hellemans pointed out, and patients may want to 'settle for an expanded-criteria donor kidney — although, in general, these kidneys perform less well.' 'Even in the absence of a true survival difference, patients may still value this kind of transplantation to improve the quality of their remaining life years,' she said. But clinicians need to be careful 'to interpret and communicate the results of our study' she cautioned, 'because, despite a very thorough pretransplant workup,' and 'careful decision-making as a transplant team, there remains an element of unpredictability and some very real risks, especially in the early post-transplant period.' Exploring the Margins of Survival Benefits The research presented here at the 62nd ERA Congress 2025 was based on an analysis of data on more than 64,000 individuals on the European Renal Association (ERA) Registry. 'Transplantation is, no doubt, the optimal treatment strategy for many of our patients with kidney failure,' said Hellemans, 'and it often leads to substantially better survival compared to continued dialysis, but its successes have also made us push the boundaries.' She pointed out that, due to a lack of suitable donor organs, clinicians have increasingly turned to less-than-ideal donors, such as those who are older, have more comorbidities, or who have died due to circulatory disorders. On the other hand, patients on dialysis now have improved survival, said Hellemans. Therefore, the question becomes: 'Where do the margins lie for the survival benefit with transplantation?' 'Although this may sound like a simple question,' she continued, 'it's actually a very difficult one to answer.' Ideally, a research question like this would be answered with a randomized control trial (RCT), 'which is impossible for ethical and practical reasons.' The next best step is to turn to registry data, but this is fraught with methodological pitfalls. Hellemans said that approximately half of such studies in the field suffer from avoidable biases, likely leading to an overestimation of the true benefit of transplantation. Moreover, the most recent comprehensive assessment of the impact of recipient age and comorbidities, and donor quality on mortality risk in older patients, was published in 2013, and Hellemans pointed out that this is a fast-evolving field, and so regular updates are required. The researchers therefore turned to the ERA Registry, which contains data on 64,013 adults from France, Catalonia (in Spain), Denmark, Norway, and the United Kingdom who were on dialysis and wait-listed for a first deceased donor kidney transplant between 2000 and 2019. The study investigators looked at 5-year survival with transplantation vs continued dialysis, stratified by donor type: standard-criteria donor kidneys, or those from donors younger than 60 years of age without significant risk factors for poor kidney function; and expanded-criteria donor kidneys, which includes all donors aged ≥ 60 years, and aged 50-59 years who had at least two of the following: a history of arterial hypertension, death from cerebrovascular accident, and/or last serum creatinine > 1.5 mg/dL. The recipients were also stratified by age and presence of comorbidities, namely diabetes, and a history of cardiovascular disease. To overcome the limitations of using registry data, the researchers turned to a methodological framework known as target trial emulation. Here, they treated their observational data as if it was from an RCT, in which transplantation was considered the intervention, and each transplant launched one of a series of sequential trials comparing the outcome with that seen for patients who remained on dialysis. They then controlled for country, time on dialysis prior to wait-listing, calendar year of transplantation, patient sex, cause of kidney failure, and diabetes. This way, Hellemans explained, they could avoid the biases that normally come with registry-based studies. Provided there is no important and measured confounding, target trial emulation can 'achieve a level of evidence that closely approximates that of a true RCT.' Standard Criteria Donor vs Extended Criteria Donor The results showed that, no matter the recipient's age, the 5-year adjusted survival rate was substantially better for transplant patients who received a standard-criteria donor organ than those who remained on dialysis. However, when the researchers turned to expanded-criteria donors, they found that the survival benefit from transplant decreased with increasing recipient age — to the extent that, among those who received a donor organ after circulatory death, the advantage all but disappeared. Among patients aged 75 years and older, 5-year survival rates for recipients who received kidneys from extended criteria donors were estimated at 57%–58%, only slightly higher than the 54% in those who remained on dialysis. A similar pattern was seen when looking at recipients with diabetes and those with cardiovascular disease: standard-criteria donors were associated with a survival benefit with transplant over remaining on dialysis — no matter the recipient's age — while the benefit dropped off sharply with increasing age in patients receiving expanded-criteria donor organs. A key factor was the increased early post-transplant mortality observed in older patients receiving expanded criteria kidney donations, Hellemans reported. There was a sharp rise in mortality risk compared with staying on dialysis in the first 10 months after undergoing transplant, followed by a drop-off in risk until, at 5 years, the hazard ratio for death was 1.01 (95% CI, 0.74-1.36) for the two approaches, she explained. Limitations of the study include the heterogeneous nature of the donor population, and potential residual confounding factors due to the lack of information on the functional status of the patients, said Hellemans. In addition, the presence of diabetes and cardiovascular disease were recorded only at the time of wait-listing, thus they did not include incident cases during follow-up. Moreover, 5-year survival as an outcome has its limitations, she pointed out, as few patients remained on dialysis beyond this timeframe. Informed Discussions With Patients 'The breadth of data we could access via the ERA Registry showed that the survival advantage of a transplant plateaus for the very oldest or highest-risk patients who are likely to receive an expanded-criteria or circulatory-death donor kidney,' said Vianda Stel, PhD, associate professor in the Department of Medical Informatics at Amsterdam UMC, the Netherlands, and director of the ERA Registry, in a press release. 'This arms clinicians with guidance to have informed discussions with their patients. The message is not 'don't transplant older people,' ' she said, but rather 'be open about uncertainty when the numbers say benefit may be marginal.' 'We were always convinced that we can give a benefit by giving a transplant to every patient on the waiting list,' Christoph Wanner, MD, PhD, professor of medicine and head of the Division of Nephrology, University of Würzburg, Germany, told Medscape Medical News . 'And now we see that, in those aged 75 years, they will not have a benefit with the expanded donor criteria.' He said that the 'big question' is whether the current findings will affect clinical decision-making. 'I think dialysis doctors will respond to this and maybe keep patients on dialysis for various reasons and not push them into transplant. This new data give us the justification' to make that argument. Given that the pool of available organs cannot be expanded, Wanner believes that current waiting lists could be rationalized so that 'the organs that are available could be directed to a smaller proportion of patients, and therefore people would benefit' from lower wait times. Daniel W. Coyne, MD, professor of medicine, Nephrology/Internal Medicine at Washington University in St. Louis, Missouri, commented on X (formerly Twitter) that the benefit with expanded-criteria donation decreases with older age 'is not what my transplant group is telling our patients in the US.' He added: 'We need this [trial] emulation in US data.' | content The research received no specific grant. Hellemans, Stel, Wanner, and Coyne reported no relevant financial relationships.
Yahoo
5 hours ago
- Yahoo
European Health IT Leaders Look to Denmark and Finland as Models for EHR Interoperability and Patient Access, Black Book Survey Reveals
Ahead of Next Week's HIMSS 25 Europe in Paris, Attendees Look to Top Interoperability Vendors for Solutions PARIS, FRANCE / / June 7, 2025 / Black Book Market Research today released findings from its latest survey highlighting the influence of Denmark and Finland on Electronic Health Record (EHR) interoperability and patient access initiatives across Europe. Conducted among 312 healthcare IT leaders from 8 higher tech-adoption European nations, the study underscores the strategic shift among healthcare organizations to emulate the advanced digital health ecosystems of these two Nordic frontrunners. According to the survey, 94% of respondents identified Denmark's comprehensive national health portal, as a model for delivering centralized patient records and seamless data exchange. Finland's Kanta platform similarly emerged as a key inspiration, cited by 90% of healthcare executives for its robust nationwide interoperability and extensive patient record accessibility. The survey also recognized standout EHR technology vendors contributing significantly to these Nordic success stories. Epic Systems, utilized by major hospitals and health regions in Denmark, was ranked highly for its interoperability performance and scalability across diverse clinical environments. TietoEVRY and CGI, prominent in the Finnish healthcare market, received notable recognition for their roles in facilitating robust connectivity and patient-centric record management through Finland's Kanta service. The report also highlighted Germany and Italy as the European nations with high EHR adoption rates yet struggling most significantly with interoperability and patient record access. Survey respondents identified primary reasons for these challenges as fragmented regional systems, lack of centralized governance, varying data standards, and insufficient investment in integrated digital health infrastructure. Providers in these countries reported an average interoperability satisfaction score of just 18%, significantly lower than Nordic benchmarks. According to respondents, responsibility for these challenges is shared: 86% cited government policy and funding issues, 21% pointed to vendor limitations in offering interoperable solutions, and 80% attributed the problems to provider reluctance or inability to implement cohesive digital strategies. "European IT leaders are closely analyzing the strategic frameworks, governance structures, and advanced technology models pioneered by Denmark and Finland," said Douglas Brown, founder of Black Book Market Research. "Their proven success with interoperability standards, comprehensive EHR adoption, and seamless data integration is inspiring other European health systems to accelerate their digital transformations with secure data exchange and patient-centric solutions." Further survey insights highlighted specific adoption trends: 91% of surveyed executives emphasized the importance of centralized national infrastructures to enable seamless EHR integration. 84% noted the critical role of stringent data standardization, including widespread adoption of HL7 FHIR standards. 60% of respondents are now accelerating plans for patient-access portals inspired by the Danish and Finnish approaches. "Denmark and Finland offer powerful examples of how cohesive digital health strategies improve patient care and operational efficiency," added Brown. "Vendors succeeding in these markets are proving vital to replicating these results throughout Europe." Top Client-Rated Interoperability Solutions Vendors at HIMSS 25 EU Attendees of HIMSS25 Europe in Paris are encouraged to visit four leading interoperability vendors highly rated in recent Black Book IT user surveys across Europe. These vendors are recognized for their advanced solutions driving seamless connectivity, comprehensive data integration, and patient-centric interoperability. Each demonstrates notable success in enabling secure data exchange, facilitating real-time patient information access, and empowering healthcare organizations to optimize patient outcomes and operational efficiency. Visitors can expect compelling demonstrations highlighting the robust capabilities and proven successes these vendors have achieved within Europe's most digitally advanced healthcare environments: InterSystems Hyland Dedalus Epic Systems About Black Book Market ResearchBlack Book Market Research is a leading global independent research firm providing unbiased, client-driven evaluations of healthcare technology and services. Black Book rankings are based entirely on user feedback and customer satisfaction data, offering strategic insights to healthcare providers, payers, vendors, and investors. For more information, visit Contact Information Press Office research@ SOURCE: Black Book Research View the original press release on ACCESS Newswire Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
