Development of electronic software for the management of trauma patients on the orthopaedic unit

Injury

Volumn 40, Issue 4, 2009, Pages 388-396

  Patel, Vishal P ^a   Raptis, Demitri ^a   Christofi, T ^a   Mathew, Rajeev ^a   Horwitz, M D ^a   Eleftheriou, K ^a   McGovern, Paul D ^a   Youngman, J ^a   Patel, J V ^a   Haddad, F S ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY COLLEGE HOSPITAL   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Clinical risk management; Database; Electronic software; Handover; Trauma

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CLINICAL PRACTICE; COMPUTER PROGRAM; DATA BASE; DEMOGRAPHY; ELECTRONICS; EMERGENCY HEALTH SERVICE; HEALTH CARE PERSONNEL; INFORMATION PROCESSING; INJURY; MEDICAL INFORMATION SYSTEM; PATIENT CARE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT; PROSPECTIVE STUDY; RISK MANAGEMENT; SURGEON; SYSTEM ANALYSIS; TOTAL QUALITY MANAGEMENT; ADULT; ELECTRONIC MEDICAL RECORD; EVALUATION STUDY; FEMALE; HOSPITAL SUBDIVISIONS AND COMPONENTS; HUMAN; INTERPERSONAL COMMUNICATION; MALE; MEDICAL STAFF; MIDDLE AGED; ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT; PROCEDURES; PUBLIC RELATIONS; UNITED KINGDOM; WOUNDS AND INJURIES;

ADULT; COMMUNICATION; CONTINUITY OF PATIENT CARE; FEMALE; HOSPITAL UNITS; HUMANS; INTERPROFESSIONAL RELATIONS; LONDON; MALE; MEDICAL RECORDS SYSTEMS, COMPUTERIZED; MEDICAL STAFF, HOSPITAL; MIDDLE AGED; PROSPECTIVE STUDIES; RISK MANAGEMENT; SOFTWARE DESIGN; WOUNDS AND INJURIES;

EID: 62549146155     PISSN: 00201383     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.injury.2008.10.006     Document Type: Article

References (38)

1. Adams W.G., Mann A.M., and Bauchner H. Use of an electronic medical record improves the quality of urban pediatric primary care. Pediatrics 111 (2003) 626-632
2. Barrie J.L., and Marsh D.R. Quality of the Manchester orthopaedic database. BMJ 304 (1992) 159-162
3. Bell D.S., and Greenes R.A. Evaluation of UltraSTAR: performance of a collaborative structured data entry system. Proceedings of the 18th Annual Symposium on Computer Applications in Medical Care (1994), American Medical Informatics Association, Bethesda, MD 216-222
4. Bhabra G., MacKeith S., Monteiro P., and Pothier D. An experimental comparison of handover methods. Ann R Coll Surg Engl 89 (2007) 298-300
5. BMA, Junior Doctors committee, National Patient safety Agency, NHS Modernisation Agency. Safe handover: safe patients. Guidance on clinical handover for clinicians and manager. London; BMA 2005.
6. Car J, Black A, Anandan C, et al. The impact of eHealth on the quality and safety of healthcare. A systematic overview and synthesis of the literature. NHS Connecting for Health Evaluation Programme, May 2008. http://www1.imperial.ac.uk/resources/4565EF18-662B-448B-90C2-E7372B4C2E09/.
7. Cheah L.P., Amott D.H., Pollard J., and Watters D.A. Electronic medical handover: towards safer medical care. MJA 183 7 (2005) 369-372
8. Crawford J.R., Beresford T.P., and Lafferty K. The CRABEL score-a method for auditing medical records. Ann R Coll Surg Engl 83 (2001) 65-68
9. Crawford J.R., Hay D., and Coleman N. Hip fracture documentation-the impact of shift systems. Injury Int J Care Injured 37 (2006) 134-137
10. Cybulska E., and Rucinski J. Communication between doctors. Br J Hosp Med 41 (1989) 266-268
11. Department of Health An organisation with a memory. Report of an expert group on learning from an adverse events in the NHS. London: Department of Health, 2005.
12. Delpierre C., Cuzin L., Fillaux J., et al. A systematic review of computer based patient record systems and quality of care: more randomized clinical trials or a broader approach?. Int J Qual Health Care 16 (2004) 407-416
13. Dick R.S., and Steen E.B. The computer-based patient record: an essential technology for health care. Revised ed. (1997), National Academy Press, Washington, DC
14. Gilbert J.A. Physician data entry: providing options is essential. Health Data Manag 6 (1998) 84-86, 88, 90-92
15. Gouveia-Oliveira A., Salgado N.C., Azevedo A.P., et al. A unified approach to the design of clinical reporting systems. Methods Inf Med 33 (1994) 479-487
16. Harrison M., Earley W., and McCarron B. Time to hand over our old way of working?. Hosp Med 66 (2005) 399-400
17. Hogan W.R., and Wagner M.M. Accuracy of data in computer-based patient records. J Am Med Inform Assoc 4 (1997) 342-355
18. Jick H., Jick S.S., and Derby L.E. Validation of information recorded on general practitioner based computerised data resources in the United Kingdom. BMJ 302 (1991) 766-768
19. Junior doctors Committee. Annual report 2004. London: British Medical Association, 2004 http://www.bma.org.uk/ap.nsf/Content/jdcannualreport2004.
20. Kuhn K., Gaus W., Wechsler J.G., et al. Structured reporting of medical findings: evaluation of a system in gastroenterology. Methods Inf Med 31 (1992) 268-274
21. National Health Service Management Executive. Hours of work of doctors in training. London: HMSO, 1991.
22. NHS modernisation Agency. Hospital at night implementation resource pack. Findings and recommendations of the hospital at night project, June 2004. http://www.modern.nhs.uk/hosptialatnight.
23. Ram R., and Block B. Signing out patients for off-hours coverage: comparison of manual and computer-aided methods. Proc Annu Symp Comput Appl Med Care (1992) 114-118
24. Rosenbloom S., Kiepek W., Belletti J., et al. Generating complex clinical documents using structured entry and reporting. Medinfo 11 (2004) 683-687
25. Roukema J., Los R.K., Bleeker S.E., et al. Paper versus computer. Feasib Electron Med Rec Gen Pediatrics 117 (2006) 15-21
26. Roughton V.J., and Severs M.P. The junior doctor handover: current practices and future expectations. J R Coll Physicians Lond 34 (2000) 366-370
27. Sarkar U., Carter J.T., Omachi T.A., et al. SynopSIS: integrating physician sign-out with the electronic medical record. J Hosp Med 2 5 (2007) 336-342
28. Strausberg J., Priv-Doz D., Koch D., et al. Comparing paper-based with electronic patient records: lessons learned during a study on diagnosis and procedure codes. J Am Med Inform Assoc 10 (2003) 470-477
29. Tang P.C., LaRosa M.P., and Gorden S.M. Use of computerised records, completeness of documentation, and appropriateness of documented clinical decisions. J Am Med Inform Assoc 6 3 (May-June) (1999) 245-251
30. The General Medical Council. Duties of a doctor: good medical practice (1995), GMC, London
31. Van der Meijden M.J., Tange H.J., Boiten J., et al. An experimental electronic patient record for stroke patients. Part 2. System description. Int J Med Inform 58-59 (2000) 127-140
32. Van Eaton E.G., Hovath K.D., Lober W.B., and Pellegrini C.A. Organising the transfer of patient care information: the development of a computerised resident sign-out system. Surgery 136 1 (July) (2004) 5-13
33. Van Eaton E.G., Horvath K.D., Lober W.B., et al. A randomised, controlled trial evaluating the impact of a computerised rounding and sign-out system on continuity of care and resident work hours. J Am Coll Surg 200 4 (April) (2005) 538-545
34. Van Eaton EG, Lober WB, Pellegrini CA, Horvath KD. User-driven design of a computerised rounding and sign-out application. AMIA 2005: Symposium Proceedings, P-1145; 2005.
35. Van Ginneken A.M. The computerized patient record: balancing effort and benefit. Int J Med Inform 65 (2002) 97-119
36. Volpp K.G.M., and Grade D. Residents' suggestions for reducing errors in teaching hospitals. N Engl J Med 348 (2003) 851-855
37. Williams R.G., Silverman R., Schwind C., et al. Surgeon information transfer and communication: factors affecting quality and efficiency of inpatient care. Ann Surg 245 (2007) 159-216
38. Young R.J., Horslry S.D., and McKenna M. the potential role of IT in supporting the work of junior doctors. J R Coll Physicians Lond 34 (2000) 366-370