Getting seamless care right from the beginning - Integrating computers into the human interaction

Studies in Health Technology and Informatics

Volumn 155, Issue , 2010, Pages 196-202

  Pearce, Christopher ^a   Kumarpeli, Pushpa ^b   De Lusignan, Simon ^c  

^a Melbourne East General Practice Network   (Australia)

^b KINGSTON UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

^c ST GEORGE'S UNIVERSITY OF LONDON   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

computers; Doctor patient relationship; family practice; medical record systems computerized; video analysis

Indexed keywords

COMPUTERS; HEALTH RISKS; MEDICINE;

COMPUTER SCREENS; DOCTOR PATIENT RELATIONSHIPS; EFFECTIVE INTERACTIONS; FAMILY PRACTICE; HEALTH SYSTEMS; HUMAN INTERACTIONS; MEDICAL RECORD SYSTEMS; VIDEO ANALYSIS;

MEDICAL COMPUTING;

EID: 77954599956     PISSN: 09269630     EISSN: 18798365     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: 10.3233/978-1-60750-563-1-196     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (27)

1. Balint M. The doctor, his patient and the illness. 2nd edn.. Churchill Livingstone, Edinburgh, 1964.
2. Szasz THM. A contribution to the philosophy of medicine: the basic models of the doctor-patient relationship. Archives of Internal Medicine 1956; 97: 201-205.
3. Bowman MA. Good Physician-Patient Relationship = Improved Patient Outcome. J Fam Practice 1991; 32: 135-136.
4. Mead N, Bower P. Patient-centred consultations and outcomes in primary care: a review of the literature. Patient Education and Counseling 2002; 48: 51-61. (Pubitemid 36151681)
5. Middleton JF. The exceptional potential of the consultation revisited. J R Coll Gen Pract 1989, 39: 383-386.
6. Stroetmann KA, Jones T, Dobrev A, Stroetmann VN. An evaluation of the economic impact of ten European e-health applications. Journal of Telemedicine & Telecare 2007, 13: 62-64.
7. Hillestad R, Bigelow J, Bower A, Girosi F, Meili R, Scoville R, Taylor R. Can electronic medical record systems transform health care? Potential health benefits, savings, and costs. The adoption of interoperable EMR systems could produce efficiency and safety savings of $142-$371 billion. Health Aff (Millwood) 2005, 24: 1103-1117.
8. Bomba D. A comparative study of computerised medical records usage among general practitioners in Australia and Sweden. Medinfo 1998, 9 Pt 1: 55-59.
9. Pearce C. Adoption of Health Informatics: Primary Care, a Model for Change: Healthcare Information Management and Systems Society AsiaPac 2008, Advancing Quality Healthcare Through IT. Hong Kong 2008. Available at http://www.himssasiapac.org/2008/education/education.aspx?d=thu
10. Jha AK, Doolan D, Grandt D, Scott T, Bates DW. The use of health information technology in seven nations. Int J Med Inform 2008, 77: 848-854.
11. Porcheret M, Hughes R, Evans D, Jordan K, Whitehurst T, Ogden H, Croft P. Data quality of general practice electronic health records: the impact of a program of assessments, feedback, and training. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2004, 11: 78-86. (Pubitemid 38044926)
12. Bensing JM, Kerssens JJ, Vanderpasch M. Patient-Directed Gaze as a Tool for Discovering and Handling Psychosocial Problems in General-Practice. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior 1995, 19: 223-242.
13. Rhodes P, Small N, Rowley E, Langdon M, Ariss S, Wright J. Electronic medical records in diabetes consultations: participants' gaze as an interactional resource. Qualitative health research 2008, 18: 1247-1263.
14. Bui D, Pearce C, Deveny E, Liaw T. Computer use in general practice consultations. Aust Fam Physician 2005, 34: 400.
15. Pearce C, Trumble S, Arnold M, Dwan K, Phillips C. Computers in the new consultation: within the first minute. Family practice 2008, 25: 202-208. (Pubitemid 351965940)
16. Pearce C, Dwan K, Arnold M, Phillips C, Trumble S. Doctor, patient and computer - a framework for the new consultation. Int J Med Inform 2009, 78: 32-38.
17. Ventres W, Kooienga S, Vuckovic N, Marlin R, Nygren P, Stewart V. Physicians, patients, and the electronic health record: an ethnographic analysis. Ann Fam Med 2006, 4: 124-131.
18. Booth N, Robinson P, Kohannejad J. Identification of high-quality consultation practice in primary care: the effects of computer use on doctor-patient rapport. Informatics in primary care 2004, 12: 75-83. (Pubitemid 39199794)
19. Western M, Dwan K, Makkai T, Del Mar C, Western J. Measuring IT use in General Practice. In Book Measuring IT use in General Practice . pp. 152. City: University of Queensland; 2001: 152. Available at 〈www.gpcg.org.au〉.
20. McInnes DK, Saltman DC, Kidd MR. General practitioners' use of computers for prescribing and electronic health records: results from a national survey. Med J Aust 2006, 185: 88-91.
21. Sportstec: Gamebreaker. In Book Gamebreaker (Editor ed.∧eds.), 5.4.12 edition. pp. Video tagging software. City: Sportstec; 2005:Video tagging software.
22. Pearce C, Dwan K, Arnold M, Phillips C. Analysing the doctor-patient-computer relationship: the use of video data. Informatics in primary care 2006, 14: 221-226. (Pubitemid 46546830)
23. de Lusignan S, Kumarapeli P, Chan T, Pflug B, van Vlymen J, Jones B, Freeman GK. The ALFA (Activity Log Files Aggregation) toolkit: a method for precise observation of the consultation. J Med Internet Res 2008, 10: e27.
24. Leong A, Koczan P, de Lusignan S, Sheeler I. A framework for comparing video methods used to assess the clinical consultation: a qualitative study. Med Inform Internet Med 2006, 31: 255-265. (Pubitemid 44843211)
25. Pflug B, Kumarapeli P, van Vlymen J, Ammenwerth E, de Lusignan S. Measuring the impact of the computer on the consultation: an open source application to combine multiple observational outputs. Inform Health Soc Care 2010, 35: 10-24.
26. Krause P, de Lusignan S. Procuring Interoperability at the expense of usability: a case study of UK National Programme for IT assurance process. In Book Procuring Interoperability at the expense of usability: a case study of UK National Programme for IT assurance process Accepted for publication EFMI STC Iceland
27. Pearce C, Shachak A, Kushniruk A, Lusignan S: Usability: a critical dimension for assessing the quality of clinical systems. Informatics in primary care 2010, 17:195-198.