Developing a wireless speech- and touch-based intelligent comprehensive triage support system

CIN - Computers Informatics Nursing

Volumn 26, Issue 1, 2008, Pages 31-38

  Chang, Polun ^a   Sheng, Yu Hsiang ^b   Sang, Yiing Yiing ^c   Wang, Da Wei ^a  

^a NATIONAL YANG MING UNIVERSITY   (Taiwan)

^b Information and Communications Research Laboratories   (Taiwan)

^c TAIPEI VETERANS GENERAL HOSPITAL   (Taiwan)

Author keywords

Mobile nursing; Nursing Informatics; Touchscreen; Voice Recognition; Wireless

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; COMPUTER INTERFACE; EMERGENCY HEALTH SERVICE; MEDICATION ERROR; METHODOLOGY; QUESTIONNAIRE;

MEDICATION ERRORS; QUESTIONNAIRES; TRIAGE; USER-COMPUTER INTERFACE;

EID: 37349056400     PISSN: 15382931     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/01.NCN.0000304754.49116.b4     Document Type: Article

References (32)

1. Malkary G. Mobile computing in nursing study. 2004. http://www.pdacortex. com/Mobile_Computing_Nursing_Study.htm. Accessed March 15, 2005.
2. Hughes SJ. Point-of-care information systems: state of the art. In: Ball MJ, Hannah KJ, Newbold SK, Douglas JV, eds. Nursing Informatics: Where Caring and Technology Meet. 3rd ed. New York, NY: Springer-Verlag; 2000:242-251.
3. Exploring Barriers to Nurse Mobile Computing. Health Data Management Web site. http://www.healthdatamanagement.com/html/supplements/himss2005/ HimssNewsStory.cfm?DID=12334. Accessed January 12, 2006.
4. Gillespie G. PDA are willing, but will they be able? 2002. Health Data Management Web site. http://www.healthdatamanagement.com/html/current/ PastIssueStory.cfm?PostID=13550&PastMonth=December&PastYear=2002. Accessed July 25, 2005.
5. Rodriguez NJ, Borges JA, Soler Y, et al. PDA vs. laptop: a comparison of two versions of a nursing documentation application. Presented at the 16th IEEE Symposium on Coumputer-Based Medical Systems (CBMS 2003); 26-27 June 2003; New York, NY.
6. Chang P, Tzeng YM, Wu SC, Sang YY, Chen SS. Development and comparison of user acceptance of advanced comprehensive triage PDA support system with a traditional terminal alternative system. In: Musen MA, Friedman CP, Teich JM, eds. Proceedings of American Medical Informatics Association. Washington DC: AMIA; 2003:140-144.
7. McCormick KA. Solving the vocabulary problem. In: Ball MJ, Hannah KJ, Newbold SK, Douglas JV, eds. Nursing Informatics: Where Caring and Technology Meet. 3rd ed. New York, NY: Springer-Verlag; 2000:110-120.
8. Briggs B. Speech recognition is finding its voice. 2004. Health Data Management Web site. http://www.healthdatamanagement. com/html/current/ PastIssueStory.cfm?PostID=16913&PastMonth=February&PastYear=2004. Accessed July 25, 2005.
9. Erdel T, Crooks S. Speech recognition technology: an outlook for human-to-machine interaction. J Healthc Inf Manag. 2000; 14(2):13-21.
10. Devine EG, Gaehde SA, Curtis AC. Comparative evaluation of three continuous speech recognition software packages in the generation of medical reports. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2000; 7(5):462-468.
11. Goedert J. Speech recognition technologies give voice to clinical data. 2002. Health Data Management Web site. http://www.healthdatamanagement.com/ issues/20021201/7710-1.html. Accessed November 19, 2007.
12. Anonymous. Speech recognition systems. Are they up to the task? Health Devices. 2002;31(2):65-71.
13. Zafar A, Overhage JM, McDonald CJ. Continuous speech recognition for clinicians. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 1999;6(3):195-204.
14. Bajaj S. Expanding the reach of speech recognition. Extending speech recognition technology benefits to transcription workflow can boost productivity. Health Manag Technol. 2004;25(3):16, 20-22.
15. Mohr DN, Turner DW, Pond GR, et al. Speech recognition as a transcription aid: a randomized comparison with standard transcription. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2003;10(1):85-93.
16. Lucas MS. Speaking of efficiency. 2001. Health Management Technology Web site. http://www.healthmgttech.com/. Accessed July 25, 2005.
17. Durlach P. Talking up an emerging technology. 2000. Health Management Technology Web site. http://www.healthmgttech. com/. Accessed July 25, 2005.
18. Drevenstedt GL, McDonald JC, Drevenstedt LW. The role of voice-activated technology in today's dental practice. J Am Dent Assoc. 2005;136(2):157-161.
19. Issenman RM, Jaffer IH. Use of voice recognition software in an outpatient pediatric specialty practice. Pediatrics. 2004;114(3):e290- e293.
20. Al-Aynati MM, Chorneyko KA. Comparison of voice-automated transcription and human transcription in generating pathology reports. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2003;127(6):721-725.
21. Henricks WH, Roumina K, Skilton BE, Ozan DJ, Goss GR. The utility and cost effectiveness of voice recognition technology in surgical pathology. Mod Pathol. 2002;15(5):565-571.
22. van Terheyden N. Is speech recognition theHoly Grail? 2005. Health Management Technology Web site. http://www.healthmgttech.com/archives/0205/ 0205is_speech.htm. AccessedMarch 15, 2005.
23. von Grey M. Technology moves into the mainstream. 2000. Health Management Technology Web site. http://www.healthmgttech.com/. Accessed July 25, 2005.
24. Rosenthal DF, Bos JM, Sokolowski RA, et al. A voice-enabled, structured medical reporting system. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 1997;4(6):436-441.
25. Kelly B. Caregivers talk about speech technology. 2001. Health Data Management Web site. http://www.healthdatamanagement.com/html/current/ PastIssueStory.cfm?PostID=6891&PastMonth=March&PastYear=2001. Accessed July 25, 2005.
26. Spring C. Productivity gains of speech-recognition technology. 2003. Health Management Technology Web site.http://www.healthmgttech.com/. Accessed July 25, 2005.
27. Delling G, Delling D. Computed assisted voice recognition. A dream or reality in the pathologist's routine work? Pathologe. 1999;20(2):115-119.
28. Mitchard H, Winkles J. Experimental comparisons of data entry by automated speech recognition, keyboard, and mouse. Hum Factors. 2002;44(2):198-209.
29. Baecker RM, Grudin J, Buxton WAS, Greenberg S. Readings in Human-Computer Interaction: Toward the Year 2000. 2nd ed. San Francisco, CA: Morgan Kaufmann Publishers; 1995:525-537.
30. Bender GT. Touchscreen Performance as a Function of the Duration of Auditory Feedback and Target Size [dissertation]. Wichita, KS: Wichita State University; 1999.
31. Deron M. How important is visual feedback when using a touch screen? 2005. http://psychology.wichita.edu/surl/usabilitynews/2W/touchscreen.htm. Accessed July 25, 2005.
32. Gilboy N, Travers D, Wuerz R. Re-evaluating triage in the new millennium: a comprehensive look at the need for standardization and quality. J Emerg Nurs. 1999;25(6):468-473.