An experimental electronic patient record for stroke patients. Part 2: System description

International Journal of Medical Informatics

Volumn 58-59, Issue , 2000, Pages 127-140

  Van Der Meijden, M J ^a   Tange, H J ^a   Boiten, J ^a   Troost, J ^a   Hasman, A ^a  

^a MAASTRICHT UNIVERSITY   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

Computerized; Information needs; Medical records; Medical records systems; Nursing records; Systems analysis

Indexed keywords

COMPUTER APPLICATIONS; DATA STRUCTURES; DATABASE SYSTEMS; ELECTRONIC DATA INTERCHANGE; HOSPITAL DATA PROCESSING; INFORMATION DISSEMINATION; INFORMATION MANAGEMENT; NEUROLOGY; SYSTEMS ANALYSIS; USER INTERFACES;

ELECTRONIC PATIENT RECORD; INFORMATION NEEDS; MEDICAL RECORD SYSTEMS; NURSING RECORDS; STROKE PATIENT; SYSTEM DESCRIPTION;

MEDICAL COMPUTING;

AUTOMATION; DATA BASE; ELECTRONICS; HEALTH CARE DELIVERY; HUMAN; INFORMATION RETRIEVAL; INFORMATION SYSTEM; MEDICAL RECORD; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REVIEW; STROKE; SYSTEM ANALYSIS; WORK;

EID: 18344398544     PISSN: 13865056     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S1386-5056(00)00081-2     Document Type: Article

References (43)

1. Hogan W.R., Wagner M.M. Accuracy of data in computer-based patient records. JAMIA. 4:1997;342-355.
2. Moorman P.W., van Ginneken A.M., Siersema P.D., van der Lei J., van Bemmel J.H. Evaluation of reporting based on descriptional knowledge. JAMIA. 2:1995;365-373.
3. Strauss A., Fagerhaugh S., Suczek B., Wiener C. Social Organization of Medical Work. 1997;Transaction Publishers, New Brunswick, NJ.
4. Dick R.S., Steen E.B. The Computer-Based Patient Record: An Essential Technology for Health Care. 1991;National Academy Press, Washington, DC.
5. Langhorne P., Williams B.O., Gilchrist W., Howie K. Do stroke units save lives? Lancet. 342:1993;395-398.
6. M.J. van der Meijden, H.J. Tange, J. Boiten, J. Troost, A. Hasman, An experimental electronic patient record for stroke patients. Part 1: Situation analysis, Int. J. Med. Inf. (2000) in press.
7. Tange H.J., Schouten H.C., Kester A.D.M., Hasman A. The granularity of medical narratives and its effect on the speed and completeness of information retrieval. JAMIA. 5:1998;571-582.
8. Tang P.C., Patel V.L. Major issues in user interface design for health professional workstations: summary and recommendations. Int. J. Biomed. Comput. 34:1994;139-148.
9. Thomas P.J. The social and interactional dimensions of human-computer interfaces. Long J. 1st edn. Human Computer Interactions. 9:1995;Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
10. Shneiderman B. Designing the User Interface. 1992;Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA.
11. Norman D.A., Draper S.W. User Centered System Design. 1986;Lawrence Erlbaum, Hilsdale, NJ.
12. Nygren E., Johnson M., Henriksson P. Reading the medical record. II. Design of a human-computer interface for basic reading of computerized medical records. Comput. Methods Programs Biomed. 39:1992;13-25.
13. Nygren E., Henriksson P. Reading the medical record. I. Analysis of physicians' ways of reading the medical record. Comput. Methods Programs Biomed. 39:1992;1-12.
14. Tange H.J., Dreessen V.A., Hasman A., Donkers H.H. An experimental electronic medical-record system with multiple views on medical narratives. Comput. Methods Programs Biomed. 54:1997;157-172.
15. Friedman C.P., Wyatt J.G. Evaluation Methods in Medical Informatics. 1997;Springer-Verlag, New York.
16. Startsman T.S., Robinson R.E. The attitudes of medical and paramedical personnel toward computers. Comput. Biomed. Res. 5:1972;218-227.
17. Teach R.L., Shortliffe E.H. An analysis of physician attitudes regarding computer-based clinical consultation systems. Comput. Biomed. Res. 14:1981;542-558.
18. Bailey J.E., Pearson S.W. Development of a tool for measuring and analyzing computer user satisfaction. Manag. Sci. 29:1983;530-545.
19. Brown S.H., Coney R.D. Changes in physicians' computer anxiety and attitudes related to clinical information system use. JAMIA. 1:1994;381-394.
20. Lewis J.R. IBM computer usability satisfaction questionnaires: psychometric evaluation and instructions for use. Int. J. Hum.-Comput. Interact. 7:1995;57-78.
21. Tange H.J. The paper-based medical record - is it really obsolete? Comput. Methods Programs Biomed. 48:1995;127-131.
22. Cork R.D., Detmer W.M., Friedman C.P. Development and initial validation of an instrument to measure physician's use of, knowledge about, and attitudes towards computers. JAMIA. 5:1998;164-176.
23. Tang P.C., LaRosa M.P., Gorden S.M. Use of computer-based records, completeness of documentation, and appropriateness of documented clinical decisions. JAMIA. 6:1999;245-251.
24. Whiting O'Keefe Q.E., Simborg D.W., Epstein W.V., Warger A. A computerized summary medical record system can provide more information than the standard medical record. J. Am. Med. Assoc. 254:1985;1185-1192.
25. Weed L.L. Medical Records, Medical Education, and Patient Care. 1971;Year Book Medical Publishers, Chicago, IL.
26. Fries J.F. Alternatives in medical record formats. Med. Care. 12:1974;871-881.
27. Rigby M., Roberts R., Williams J., Clark J., Savill A., Lervy B., Mooney G. Integrated record keeping as an essential aspect of a primary care led health service. Br. Med. J. 317:1998;579-582.
28. Sicotte C., Denis J., Lehoux P. The computer based patient record: a strategic issue in process innovation. J. Med. Syst. 22:1998;431-443.
29. Schneider K., Wagner I. Constructing the 'Dossier Représentatif'. Computer-based information-sharing in French hospitals. CSCW. 1:1993;229-253.
30. Hebert M.A. Impact of IT on health care professionals: changes in work and the productivity paradox. Health Serv. Manag. Res. 11:1998;69-79.
31. Bürkle T., Kuch R., Prokosch H.-U., Dudeck J. Stepwise evaluation of information systems in an university hospital. Meth. Inform. Med. 38:1999;9-15.
32. Kaplan B. The influence of medical values and practices on medical computer applications. Anderson J.G., Jay S.J. Use and Impact of Computers in Clinical Medicine, Computers and Medicine. 1987;39-50 Springer-Verlag, New York.
33. Berg M. Considerations for sociotechnical design: experiences with an electronic patient record in a clinical context. Int. J. Med. Inf. 52:1998;243-251.
34. Forsythe D.E. New bottles, old wine: hidden cultural assumptions in a computerized explanation system for migraine suffers. Med. Anthropol. Q. 10:1996;551-574.
35. Papa M.J. Communication network patterns and employee performance with new technology. Commun. Res. 17:1990;344-368.
36. B. Kaplan, in: R. Greenes (Ed.), An evaluation model for clinical information systems: clinical imaging systems, Medinfo 95 (1995) 1087.
37. Kaplan B. Addressing organizational issues to the evaluation of medical systems. JAMIA. 4:1997;94-101.
38. Aydin C.E. Occupational adaptation to computerized medical information systems. J. Health Soc. Behav. 30:1989;163-179.
39. Aydin C.E., Rice R.E. Bringing social worlds together: computers as catalysts for new interactions in health care organizations. J. Health Soc. Behav. 33:1992;168-185.
40. Symon G., Long K., Ellis J. The coordination of work activities: cooperation and conflict in a hospital context. CSCW. 5:1996;1-31.
41. C.T. Barry, L.K. Gibbons, Information systems technology: Barriers and challenges to implementation, JONA 20 (1990) 40-2.
42. Aydin C.E., Rice R.E. Social worlds, individual differences, and implementation. Predicting attitudes toward a medical information system. Inf. Manag. 20:1991;119-136.
43. Davis F.D. Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use and user acceptance of information technology. M.I.S. Q. 13:1989;319-339.