Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Application fields for the new Object Management Group (OMG) Standards Case Management Model and Notation (CMMN) and Decision Management Notation (DMN) in the perioperative field

  • Original Article
  • Published:
International Journal of Computer Assisted Radiology and Surgery Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

Medical processes can be modeled using different methods and notations. Currently used modeling systems like Business Process Model and Notation (BPMN) are not capable of describing the highly flexible and variable medical processes in sufficient detail.

Methods

We combined two modeling systems, Business Process Management (BPM) and Adaptive Case Management (ACM), to be able to model non-deterministic medical processes. We used the new Standards Case Management Model and Notation (CMMN) and Decision Management Notation (DMN).

Results

First, we explain how CMMN, DMN and BPMN could be used to model non-deterministic medical processes. We applied this methodology to model 79 cataract operations provided by University Hospital Leipzig, Germany, and four cataract operations provided by University Eye Hospital Tuebingen, Germany. Our model consists of 85 tasks and about 20 decisions in BPMN. We were able to expand the system with more complex situations that might appear during an intervention.

Conclusion

An effective modeling of the cataract intervention is possible using the combination of BPM and ACM. The combination gives the possibility to depict complex processes with complex decisions. This combination allows a significant advantage for modeling perioperative processes.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Anderson BO, Braun S, Carlson RW, Gralow JR, Lagios MD, Lehman C, Schwartsmann G, Vargas HI (2003) Overview of breast health care guidelines for countries with limited resources. Breast J 9(s2):S42–S50

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Bernd Rücker (2015) Case management and CMMN for developers. http://www.irmconnects.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/06Bernd_Rucker_Case_Management_and_CMMN_for_Developers.pdf. Accessed 19 Jan 2016

  3. Braun R, Schlieter H, Burwitz M, Esswein W (2015) Extending a business process modeling language for domain-specific adaptation in healthcare. Wirtschaftsinformatik Proceedings 2015

  4. Buzink SN, van Lier L, de Hingh Ignace H J T, Jakimowicz JJ (2010) Risk-sensitive events during laparoscopic cholecystectomy: the influence of the integrated operating room and a preoperative checklist tool. Surg Endosc 24(8):1990–1995

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  5. Fink E (2015) Ein Framework zur nutzerzentrierten Visualisierung perioperativer Prozesse. Master-Thesis, Hochschule Reutlingen, Medien- und Kommunikationsinformatik

  6. Fink E, Hlavac M, Wirtz CR, Burgert O (2013) Workflow, ergonomics and new concepts in surgery. Conceptual design of an intraoperative user interface for a workflow management system for surgical planning and intraoperative support. Int J CARS 8(S1):171–179

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Fischer L (ed) (2012) How knowledge workers get things done. Real-world adaptive case management. Excellence in practice series. Future Strategies, Lighthouse Point

    Google Scholar 

  8. Fischer L (ed) (2015) Thriving on adaptability. Best practices for knowledge workers. Excellence in practice series. Future Strategies, Lighthouse Point

  9. Forestier G, Lalys F, Riffaud L, Louis Collins D, Meixensberger J, Wassef SN, Neumuth T, Goulet B, Jannin P (2013) Multi-site study of surgical practice in neurosurgery based on surgical process models. J Biomed Inf 46(5):822–829

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Freund J, Rücker B (2010) Praxishandbuch BPMN 2.0. Hanser, München

    Book  Google Scholar 

  11. Haynes AB, Weiser TG, Berry WR, Lipsitz SR, Breizat A-HS, Dellinger EP, Herbosa T, Joseph S, Kibatala PL, Lapitan MCM, Merry AF, Moorthy K, Reznick RK, Taylor B, Gawande AA (2009) A surgical safety checklist to reduce morbidity and mortality in a global population. N Engl J Med 360(5):491–499

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Neumann J, Rockstroh M, Franke S, Neumuth T (2016) BPMNSIX—A BPMN 2.0 surgical intervention extension. In 7th workshop on modeling and monitoring of computer assisted interventions (M2CAI), 19th international conference on medical image computing and computer assisted interventions (MICCAI 2016), Athens, Greece

  13. Jannin P, Morandi X (2007) Surgical models for computer-assisted neurosurgery. NeuroImage 37(3):783–791

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Kohn LT, Corrigan J, Donaldson MS (2000) To err is human building a safer health system. Quality chasm series. National Academy Press, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  15. Lalys F, Jannin P (2014) Surgical process modelling: a review. Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg 9(3):495–511

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Neumann J, Rockstroh M, Vinz S, Neumuth T (2015) Technical report: surgical workflow and process modeling. Universität Leipzig, ICCAS

  17. Neumann J, Wiemuth M, Burgert O, Neumuth T (2017) Application of activity semantics and BPMN 2.0 in the generation and modeling of generic surgical process models. In Submitted at: Computer Assisted Radiology and Surgery

  18. Neumuth T (2012) Surgical Process Modeling - Theory, Methods, and Applications. https://www.iccas.de/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/Neumuth-Surgical-Process-Modeling.pdf. Accessed 09 Jan 2017

  19. Neumuth T, Jannin P, Schlomberg J, Meixensberger J, Wiedemann P, Burgert O (2011) Analysis of surgical intervention populations using generic surgical process models. Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg 6(1):59–71

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Neumuth T, Pretschner A, Trantakis C, Fischer M, Lemke HU, Burgert O (2005) An approach to XML-based description of intraoperative surgical workflows. In: XML-Tage 2005 in Berlin [Tagungsband], Rainer Eckstein, Ed. 12.–14. September 2005 in Berlin. Universität Berlin. Berlin: Humboldt-Univ, pp 147–152

  21. Niederlag W (ed) (2014) Der digitale Operationssaal. Health academy 2. De Gruyter, Berlin

    Google Scholar 

  22. Object Management Group (2014) Case Management Model and Notation. Version 1.0. http://www.omg.org/spec/CMMN/1.0/PDF/. Accessed 19 Jan 2016

  23. Object Management Group (2015) Case Management Model and Notation. Version 1:1. http://www.omg.org/spec/CMMN/1.1/PDF/. Accessed 19 Jan 2016

  24. Object Management Group (2015) Decision Model and Notation. Version 1.0. http://www.omg.org/spec/DMN/1.0/PDF/. Accessed 19 Jan 2016

  25. Object Management Group (2016) Decision Model and Notation. Version 1:1. http://www.omg.org/spec/DMN/1.1/PDF/. Accessed 19 Jan 2016

  26. Padoy N, Blum T, Ahmadi S-A, Feussner H, Berger M-O, Navab N (2012) Statistical modeling and recognition of surgical workflow. Med Image Anal 16(3):632–641

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Simpson DD (2004) A conceptual framework for drug treatment process and outcomes. J Subst Abuse Treat 27(2):99–121

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Swenson KD (2010) Mastering the unpredictable. How adaptive case management will revolutionize the way that knowledge workers get things done. Landmark books. Meghan-Kiffer Press, Tampa

    Google Scholar 

  29. Therasse P, Arbuck SG, Eisenhauer EA, Wanders J, Kaplan RS, Rubinstein L, Verweij J, van Glabbeke M, van Oosterom AT, Christian MC, Gwyther SG (2000) New guidelines to evaluate the response to treatment in solid tumors. JNCI J Natl Cancer Inst 92(3):205–216

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank Martin Schmollinger for many fruitful discussions on ACM and the best practices for modeling.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Informatics, Research Group Computer Assisted Medicine (CaMed) Reutlingen, Reutlingen University, Reutlingen, Germany

    M. Wiemuth, D. Junger & O. Burgert

  2. Centre for Ophthalmology, University Eye Hospital Tuebingen, Tuebingen, Germany

    M. A. Leitritz

  3. Innovation Center for Computer Assisted Surgery (ICCAS), Leipzig University, Leipzig, Germany

    J. Neumann & T. Neumuth

Authors
  1. M. Wiemuth
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. D. Junger
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. M. A. Leitritz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. J. Neumann
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. T. Neumuth
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. O. Burgert
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to M. Wiemuth or O. Burgert.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical standards

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki Declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Informed consent

This articles does not contain patient data.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Wiemuth, M., Junger, D., Leitritz, M.A. et al. Application fields for the new Object Management Group (OMG) Standards Case Management Model and Notation (CMMN) and Decision Management Notation (DMN) in the perioperative field. Int J CARS 12, 1439–1449 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11548-017-1608-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11548-017-1608-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation