Electronic medical records should be structured;Elektroniske pasientjournaler bør være strukturerte

Tidsskrift for den Norske Laegeforening

Volumn 127, Issue 16, 2007, Pages 2090-2093

  Krüger, Kjell ^a  

^a Løvåsen Undervisningssykehjem ^*

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS; DECISION SUPPORT SYSTEM; ECONOMICS; EUROPE; HEALTH CARE QUALITY; HUMAN; MEDICAL RECORD; REVIEW; STANDARD; UNITED STATES;

COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS; DECISION SUPPORT TECHNIQUES; EUROPE; HUMANS; MEDICAL RECORDS SYSTEMS, COMPUTERIZED; NURSING RECORDS; QUALITY ASSURANCE, HEALTH CARE; UNITED STATES;

EID: 34848856102     PISSN: 00292001     EISSN: 08077096     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Review

References (35)

1. Overhage JM, Tierny WM, Zhou XH et al. A randomized trial of «corollary orders» to prevent errors of omission. J Am Med Inform Assoc 1997; 4: 364-75.
2. American Health Information Management Association. Position statement. Issue: healthcare reform - information systems and the need for computer-based patient records. J Am Med Inform Assoc 1994; 65 (suppl 1-2): 84.
3. Rehab-Nor. Legetjenester til brukere av pleieog omsorgstjenester. Oslo: Sosial- og helsedirektoratet, 2005: 6.
4. Nasjonal helseplan (2007-2010). Oslo: Sosialog helsedirektoratet, 2006.
5. «..og bedre skal det bli!» Nasjonal strategi for kvalitetsforbedring i sosial- og helsetjenesten. Oslo: Sosial- og helsedirektoratet, 2005.
6. S@mspill 2007. Oslo: Sosial- og helsedirektoratet, 2005.
7. S@mspill 2007s gjennomføringsplan for 2007. Oslo: Sosial- og helsedirektoratet, 2006.
8. Kawamoto K. Improving clinical practice using clinical decision support systems: a systematic review of trials to identify features critical to success. BMJ 2005; 330: 765.
9. Matsumura Y. Devices for structured data entry in electronic patient record. Medinfo 1998; 9: 85-8.
10. Martins SB. Evaluation of KNAVE-II: a tool for intelligent query and exploration of patient data. Medinfo 2004; 11: 648-52.
11. Hogan WR, Wagner MM. Free-text fields change the meaning of coded data. Proc AMIA Annu Fall Symp 1996; 517-21.
12. Mansson J. Collection and retrieval of structured clinical data from electronic patient records in general practice. A first-phase study to create a health care database for research and quality assessment. Scand J Prim Health Care 2004; 22: 6-10.
13. Nilsson G, Ahlfeldt H, Strender LE. Computerisation, coding, data retrieval and related attitudes among Swedish general practitioners - a survey of necessary conditions for a database of diseases and health problems. Int J Med Inform 2002; 65: 135-43.
14. Belmin J. Quality of the information collected during admission to a hospital geriatric service: importance of a structured medical record. Presse Med 1998; 27: 1519-22.
15. Sahlstedt S. Nursing process documentation-effects on workload and quality when using a computer program and a key word model for nursing documentation. Stud Health Technol Inform 1997; 46: 330-6.
16. Jamison RN. Electronic diaries for monitoring chronic pain: 1-year validation study. Pain 2001; 91: 277-85.
17. Palermo TM, Valenzuela D, Stork PP. A randomized trial of electronic versus paper pain diaries in children: impact on compliance, accuracy, and acceptability. Pain 2004; 107: 213-9.
18. Thomas K, Emberton M, Mundy AR. Towards a minimum dataset in urology. BJU Int 2000; 86: 765-72.
19. Hanzlicek P, Spidlen J, Nagy M. Universal electronic health record MUDR. Stud Health Technol Inform 2004; 105: 190-201.
20. Hetlevik I. Implementing clinical guidelines in the treatment of hypertension in general practice. Blood Press 1998; 7: 270-6.
21. Hetlevik I, Holmen J, Kruger O. Implementing clinical guidelines in the treatment of hypertension in general practice. Evaluation of patient outcome related to implementation of a computer-based clinical decision support system. Scand J Prim Health Care 1999; 17: 35-40.
22. Khoury AT. Support of quality and business goals by an ambulatory automated medical record system in Kaiser Permanente of Ohio. Eff Clin Pract 1998; 1: 73-82.
23. Nilsson G. Feedback on prescribing rate combined with problem-oriented pharmacotherapy education as a model to improve prescribing behaviour among general practitioners. Eur J Clin Pharmacol 2001; 56: 843-8.
24. Ornstein S. A multimethod quality improvement intervention to improve preventive cardiovascular care: a cluster randomized trial. Ann Intern Med 2004; 141: 523-32.
25. Johnston RL. Pilot National Electronic Cataract Surgery Survey: I. Method, descriptive, and process features. Eye 2005; 19: 788-94.
26. Backus L. The Immunology Case Registry. J Clin Epidemiol 2001; 54 (suppl 1): S12-5.
27. Murphy DJ, Gross R, Buchanan J. Computerized reminders for five preventive screening tests: generation of patient-specific letters incorporating physician preferences. Proc Am Med Inform Assoc Ann Symp 2000; 600-4.
28. Marshall PD, Chin HL. The effects of an electronic medical record on patient care: clinician attitudes in a large HMO. Proc AMIA Symp 1998; 150-4.
29. Murff HJ. Primary care physician attitudes concerning follow-up of abnormal test results and ambulatory decision support systems. Int J Med Inform 2003; 71: 137-49.
30. Moody LE. Electronic health records documentation in nursing: nurses' perceptions, attitudes, and preferences. Comput Inform Nurs 2004; 22: 337-44.
31. Matsumura Y. Dynamic viewer of medical events in electronic medical record. Medinfo 2001; 10: 648-52.
32. Aabakken L. Utvikling og bruk av en database for gastrorenterologisk endoskopi. Tidsskr Nor Lægeforen 1992; 112: 1441-5.
33. Aabakken L. SADE database for endoscopic procedures: aspects of clinical use. Endoscopy 1991; 23: 269-71.
34. Poon AD, Fagan LM. PEN-Ivory: the design and evaluation of a pen-based computer system for structured data entry. Proc Ann Symp Comput Appl Med Care 1994; 447-51.
35. Poon AD, Fagan LM, Shortliffe EH. The PEN-Ivory project: exploring user-interface design for the selection of items from large controlled vocabularies of medicine. J Am Med Inform Assoc 1996; 3: 168-83.