Advertisement

Transforming the Physician Practice: Interviewing Patients with a Computer

  • Allen R. Wenner
  • John W. Bachman
Part of the Health Informatics Series book series (HI)

Abstract

Physician practices have evolved dramatically from the solo operations of yesteryear consisting of the husband-physician and wife-nurse team. Today, most physician practices are members of a larger group practice, sometimes a group of three physicians and sometimes multispecialty conglomerates with several hundred physicians. Within these myriad possibilities, there exist a variety of managed care structures, such as health maintenance organizations (HMO), preferred provider organizations (PPO), and physician hospital organizations (PHO). This evolution has resulted in the emergence of physician practice management as a field of study and in the reorganization of physician practices, in such a manner that the quality of patient care is of utmost priority.

Keywords

Electronic Medical Record Neck Pain Physician Practice Electronic Medical Record System Personal Health Record 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Osler William (Sir). Aphorism attributed to him, appearing on a medal designed for the Jikei Medical College, Tokyo, Japan. (See Osler B and Osler CS.) New York: Oxford University Press; 1997.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Brodman K, Erdmann AJ Jr, Lorge I, et al. The Cornell Medical Index: an adjunct to medical interview. JAMA 1949; 140: 530–534.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    West C. Routine complications: troubles with talk between doctors and patients. Bloomington: Indiana University Press; 1984.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Beckman HB, Frankel RM. The effect of physician behavior on the collection of data. Ann Intern Med 1984; 101: 692–696.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Marvel MK, Epstein RM, Flowers K, et al. Soliciting the patient’s agenda: have we improved? JAMA 1999; 281: 283–287.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Morrison I, Smith R. Hamster health care: time to stop running faster and redesign health care (editorial). Br Med J 2000; 321: 1541–1542.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Slack WV, Hicks GP, Reed CE, et al. A computer-based medical-history system. N Engl J Med 1966; 274: 194–198.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Bachman JW. The patient-computer interview: a neglected tool that can aid the clinician. Mayo Clin Proc 2003; 78: 67–78.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Colby KM. Cited by Erdman HP, Klein MH, Greist JH. Direct patient computer interviewing. J Consult Clin Psychol 1985; 53: 760–773.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Wenner A. EMR data input from the patient’s home. Conference Proceedings—Toward an Electronic Patient Record’99, vol 3. Medical Record Institute: Newton, MA; 1999. p. 68–73.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Mayne JG, Weksel W, Sholtz PN. Toward automating the medical history. Mayo Clin Proc 1968; 43: 1–25.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Wald JS, Rind D, Safran C, et al. Patient entries in the electronic medical record: an interactive interview used in primary care. Proc Annu Symp Comput Appl Med Care 1995; 19: 147–151.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Berwick DM, Murphy JM, Goldman PA, et al. Performance of a five-item mental health screening test. Med Care 1991; 29: 169–176.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Jancin B. Two hours a day of unreimbursed time. Fam Pract News, June 1, 2001.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Committee of Quality of Healthcare in America, Institute of Medicine. Crossing the quality chasm: a new health system for the 21st century. Washington, DC: National Academy Press; 2001.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Krishna S, Balas EA, Spencer DC, et al. Clinical trials of interactive computerized patient education: implications for family practice. J Fam Pract 1997; 45: 25–33.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Williams RB, Boles M, Johnson RE. A patient-initiated system for preventive health care: a randomized trial in community-based primary care practices. Arch Fam Med 1998; 7: 338–345.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Rhodes KV, Lauderdale DS, Stocking CB, et al. Better health while you wait: a controlled trial of a computer-based intervention for screening and health promotion in the emergency department. Ann Emerg Med 2001; 37: 284–291.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Erdman HP, Greist JH, Gustafson DH, et al. Suicide risk prediction by computer interview: a prospective study. J Clin Psychiatry 1987; 48: 464–467.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Lapham SC, Kring MK, Skipper B. Prenatal behavioral risk screening by computer in a health maintenance organization-based prenatal care clinic.Am J Obstet Gynecol 1991; 165: 506–514.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    C’De Baca J, Lapham SC, Skipper BJ, et al. Use of computer interview data to test associations between risk factors and pregnancy outcomes. Comput Biomed Res 1997; 30: 232–243.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  • Allen R. Wenner
    • 1
  • John W. Bachman
    • 2
  1. 1.School of Medicine at Columbiathe University of South CarolinaUSA
  2. 2.the Mayo Medical SchoolRochesterUSA

Personalised recommendations