Advertisement

A Concept for the Assessment of Electronic Communication in Integrated Information Systems

  • Samrend Saboor
  • Elske Ammenwerth
Part of the Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing book series (LNBIP, volume 17)

Abstract

Integrated hospital information systems are complex architectures that are grown over the course of years. Changing such architectures is challenging - negative side effects are hardly predictable. The objective of this paper is to present a concept that adequately describes communication processes and systematically detects potential errors. Qualitative content analysis and problem-centered expert-interviews were applied to collect communication errors and their reasons in a structured categorization. The categorization was used to derive requirements for the description of communication processes and the detection of errors. The developed concept describes communication processes as chains of application systems that transfer instances of information objects via communication interfaces. The concept was developed considering common problems of the electronic communication in integrated information systems. The evaluation of the concept is planned. The resulting concept could assist hospital information management to plan changes for the information system and to foresee severe conflicts.

Keywords

Hospital information management System architecture Classification 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Haux, R.: Health information systems - past, present, future. Int. J. Med. Inform. 75(3-4), 268–281 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Enrico, C.: When conversation is better than computation. JAMIA 7(3), 277–286 (2000)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Brazhnik, O., Jones, J.F.: Anatomy of data integration. J. Biomed. Inform. 40(3), 252–269 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Kun, L.: Interoperability: the cure for what ails us. IEEE Eng. Med. Biol. Mag. 26(1), 87–90 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    ACR/NEMA. DICOM Homepage (2008) (cited, June 2008 ), http://medical.nema.org
  6. 6.
    HL7. Health Level 7 (2008) (cited, June 2008), http://hl7.org
  7. 7.
    Hammond, K.W., Helbig, S.T., Benson, C.C., Brathwaite-Sketoe, B.M.: Are electronic medical records trustworthy? Observations on copying, pasting and duplication. In: AMIA Annu. Symp. Proc., pp. 269–273 (2003)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Matthews, J.W., Bosch, W.R.: Explicit-VR transfer syntax limits the value multiplicity of DICOM data elements with decimal string (DS) value representation. Phys. Med. Biol. 51(5), L11–L12 (2006)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    HIMMS/RSNA. IHE - changing the way healthcare connects (2008) (cited, June 2008 ), http://www.ihe.net
  10. 10.
    Mildenberger, P., Wein, B., Bursig, H.P., Eichelberg, M.: Current developments in DICOM and IHE. Radiologe 45(8), 682–689 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Reichert, M., Dadam, P.: Towards Towards Process-oriented Hospital Information Systems: Some Insights into Requirements, Technical Challenges and Possible Solutions. In: Proceedings of the 43rd GMDS (GMDS 1998), Bremen, pp. 175–180 (1998)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Augustin, S.: Information als Wettbewerbsfaktor: Informationslogistik - Herausforderung an das Management. Köln (1990)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Dadam, P., Reichert, M., Kuhn, K.: Clinical Workflows - The Killer Application for Process-oriented Information Systems. In: Proceedings of the 4th Int. Conference on Business Information systems, Poznan, Poland, April 2000, pp. 36–59 (2000)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Boochever, S.S.: HIS/RIS/PACS integration: getting to the gold standard. Radiol. Manage 26(3), 16–24, 25–27 (2004)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Carr, C.D., Moore, S.M.: IHE: a model for driving adoption of standards. Comput. Med. Imaging Graph 27(2-3), 137–146 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Brigl, B., Strübing, A., Wendt, T., Winter, A.: Modeling interdependencies between information processes and communication paths in hospitals. Methods Inf. Med. 45(2), 216–224 (2006)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Hoffmann, I., Bergmann, J., Bott, O.J., Pretschner, D.P.: Einsatz einer rechnergestützten Modellierungs- und Simulationsumgebung für den Entwurf telemedizinischer Systeme am Beispiel von MOSAIK-M. In: Steyer, G., Tolxdorff, T. (eds.) TELEMED 2005, pp. 309–320. Aka-Verlag, Berlin (2005)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Blake, J., Carter, M., O’Brien-Pallas, L., McGillis-Hall, L.: A surgical process management tool. Medinfo 8(1), 527–531 (1995)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Alexopoulos, C., Goldsman, D., Fontanesi, J., Sawyer, M., De Guire, M., Kopald, D., et al.: Healthcare I: a discrete-event simulation application for clinics serving the poor. In: Winter Simulation Conference - Proceedings of the 33rd conference on Winter simulation, pp. 1386–1391 (2001)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Saboor, S., Chimiak-Opoka, J., Ammenwerth, E.: Supporting the systematic assessment of clinical processes: the MedFlow method. Methods Inf. Med. 46(5), 586–594 (2007)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Haux, R., Winter, A., Ammenwerth, E., Brigl, B.: Strategic Information Management in Hospitals. Springer, New York (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Kotter, E., Langer, M.: Integrating HIS-RIS-PACS: the Freiburg experience. Eur. Radiol. 8(9), 1707–1718 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Saboor, S., Ammenwerth, E.: Assessing communication processes within integrated health information systems. In: Proceedings of the Sixth IASTED International Conference on Biomedical Engineering; 2008, Innsbruck, Austria (2008)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Object Management Group. Object Managment Group - UML (2008) (cited, June 2008), http://www.uml.org
  25. 25.
    AG IDS Scheer. IDS Scheer AG - Country Site DE: ARIS Software (Modeling): Ereignisgesteuerte Prozessketten (2008) (cited May 14, 2008), http://www.aris.de/de/Software/EPK_Modellierungsstandards/79890.html?mod_srchresult_link=1
  26. 26.
    Saboor, S., Chimiak-Opoka, J., Ammenwerth, E.: Supporting the Systematic Assessment of Clinical Processes: the MedFlow Method. Methods Inf. Med. 46(5), 586–594 (2007)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Samrend Saboor
    • 1
  • Elske Ammenwerth
    • 1
  1. 1.Institute for Health Information SystemsUniversity for Health Sciences, Medical Informatics and Technology (UMIT)Hall in TyrolAustria

Personalised recommendations