Dataset Information

Technical requirements framework of hospital information systems: design and evaluation.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:Implementing the health information system (HIS) is more complex and costly than implementing other information systems. The present study was conducted to design and evaluate technical requirements for the HIS. METHODS:The present study was conducted in 2016 by determining technical requirements for the HIS using the Delphi technique and then evaluating this system using a checklist based on the approved requirements. RESULTS:The first part of the study designed a 73-item final list of technical requirements for the HIS in four domains, i.e. communication service, system architecture, security service and system response time. The evaluation results obtained in the second part showed that communication service was met in 63.8% of the HIS programs, system architecture in 65.5%, security service in 72.4% and system response time in 76.3%. CONCLUSIONS:A technical evaluation tool was designed and used to select and evaluate the HIS. The evaluation results suggested the study HIS was poorer in terms of communication service and system architecture than in the other two dimensions.

SUBMITTER: Farzandipour M

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7119017 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Apr

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Technical requirements framework of hospital information systems: design and evaluation.

Farzandipour Mehrdad M Meidani Zahra Z Nabovati Ehsan E Sadeqi Jabali Monireh M Dehghan Banadaki Razieh R

BMC medical informatics and decision making 20200403 1

<h4>Background</h4>Implementing the health information system (HIS) is more complex and costly than implementing other information systems. The present study was conducted to design and evaluate technical requirements for the HIS.<h4>Methods</h4>The present study was conducted in 2016 by determining technical requirements for the HIS using the Delphi technique and then evaluating this system using a checklist based on the approved requirements.<h4>Results</h4>The first part of the study designed ...[more]

PMID: 32245499

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundNumerous studies have revealed widespread clinician frustration with the usability of electronic health records (EHRs) that is counterproductive to adoption of EHR systems to meet the aims of health-care reform. With poor system usability comes increased risk of negative unintended consequences. Usability issues could lead to user error and workarounds that have the potential to compromise patient safety and negatively impact the quality of care.[1] While there is ample research on EHR usability, there is little information on the usability of laboratory information systems (LISs). Yet, LISs facilitate the timely provision of a great deal of the information needed by physicians to make patient care decisions.[2] Medical and technical advances in genomics that require processing of an increased volume of complex laboratory data further underscore the importance of developing user-friendly LISs. This study aims to add to the body of knowledge on LIS usability.MethodsA survey was distributed among LIS users at hospitals across the United States. The survey consisted of the ten-item System Usability Scale (SUS). In addition, participants were asked to rate the ease of performing 24 common tasks with a LIS. Finally, respondents provided comments on what they liked and disliked about using the LIS to provide diagnostic insight into LIS perceived usability.ResultsThe overall mean SUS score of 59.7 for the LIS evaluated is significantly lower than the benchmark of 68 (P < 0.001). All LISs evaluated received mean SUS scores below 68 except for Orchard Harvest (78.7). While the years of experience using the LIS was found to be a statistically significant influence on mean SUS scores, the combined effect of years of experience and LIS used did not account for the statistically significant difference in the mean SUS score between Orchard Harvest and each of the other LISs evaluated.ConclusionsThe results of this study indicate that overall usability of LISs is poor. Usability lags that of systems evaluated across 446 usability surveys.

Project description:This paper introduces a time- and state-dependent measure of integrated information, phi, which captures the repertoire of causal states available to a system as a whole. Specifically, phi quantifies how much information is generated (uncertainty is reduced) when a system enters a particular state through causal interactions among its elements, above and beyond the information generated independently by its parts. Such mathematical characterization is motivated by the observation that integrated information captures two key phenomenological properties of consciousness: (i) there is a large repertoire of conscious experiences so that, when one particular experience occurs, it generates a large amount of information by ruling out all the others; and (ii) this information is integrated, in that each experience appears as a whole that cannot be decomposed into independent parts. This paper extends previous work on stationary systems and applies integrated information to discrete networks as a function of their dynamics and causal architecture. An analysis of basic examples indicates the following: (i) phi varies depending on the state entered by a network, being higher if active and inactive elements are balanced and lower if the network is inactive or hyperactive. (ii) phi varies for systems with identical or similar surface dynamics depending on the underlying causal architecture, being low for systems that merely copy or replay activity states. (iii) phi varies as a function of network architecture. High phi values can be obtained by architectures that conjoin functional specialization with functional integration. Strictly modular and homogeneous systems cannot generate high phi because the former lack integration, whereas the latter lack information. Feedforward and lattice architectures are capable of generating high phi but are inefficient. (iv) In Hopfield networks, phi is low for attractor states and neutral states, but increases if the networks are optimized to achieve tension between local and global interactions. These basic examples appear to match well against neurobiological evidence concerning the neural substrates of consciousness. More generally, phi appears to be a useful metric to characterize the capacity of any physical system to integrate information.

Project description:BackgroundAdverse drug reactions (ADRs) may cause serious injuries including death. Timely reporting of ADRs may play a significant role in patient safety; however, underreporting exists. Enhancing the electronic communication of ADR information to regulators and between health care providers has the potential to reduce recurrent ADRs and improve patient safety.ObjectiveThe main objectives were to explore the low rate of ADR reporting by community pharmacists (CPs) in Australia, evaluate the usability of an existing reporting system, and how this knowledge may influence the design of subsequent electronic ADR reporting systems.MethodsThe study was carried out in 2 stages. Stage 1 involved qualitative semistructured interviews to identify CPs' perceived barriers and facilitators to ADR reporting. Data were analyzed by thematic analysis, and identified themes were subsequently aligned to the task-technology fit (TTF) framework. The second stage involved a usability evaluation of a commercial web-based ADR reporting system. A structured interview protocol that combined virtual observation, think-aloud moderating techniques, retrospective questioning of the overall user experience, and a System Usability Scale (SUS). The field notes from the interviews were subjected to thematic analysis.ResultsIn total, 12 CPs were interviewed in stage 1, and 7 CPs participated in stage 2. The interview findings show that CPs are willing to report ADRs but face barriers from environmental, organizational, and IT infrastructures. Increasing ADR awareness, improving workplace practices, and implementing user-focused electronic reporting systems were seen as facilitators of ADR reporting. User testing of an existing system resulted in above average usability (SUS 68.57); however, functional and user interpretation issues were identified. Design elements such as a drop-down menu, free-text entry, checkbox, and prefilled data fields were perceived to be extremely useful for navigating the system and facilitating ADR reporting.ConclusionsExisting reporting systems are not suited to report ADRs, or adapted to workflow, and are rarely used by CPs. Our study uncovered important contextual information for the design of future ADR reporting interventions. Based on our study, a multifaceted, theory-guided, user-centered, and best practice approach to design, implementation, and evaluation may be critical for the successful adoption of ADR reporting electronic interventions and patient safety. Future studies are needed to evaluate the effectiveness of theory-driven frameworks used in the design and implementation of ADR reporting systems.

Project description:The pace of innovation in radiation oncology is high and the window of opportunity for evaluation narrow. Financial incentives, industry pressure, and patients' demand for high-tech treatments have led to widespread implementation of innovations before, or even without, robust evidence of improved outcomes has been generated. The standard phase I-IV framework for drug evaluation is not the most efficient and desirable framework for assessment of technological innovations. In order to provide a standard assessment methodology for clinical evaluation of innovations in radiotherapy, we adapted the surgical IDEAL framework to fit the radiation oncology setting. Like surgery, clinical evaluation of innovations in radiation oncology is complicated by continuous technical development, team and operator dependence, and differences in quality control. Contrary to surgery, radiotherapy innovations may be used in various ways, e.g., at different tumor sites and with different aims, such as radiation volume reduction and dose escalation. Also, the effect of radiation treatment can be modeled, allowing better prediction of potential benefits and improved patient selection. Key distinctive features of R-IDEAL include the important role of predicate and modeling studies (Stage 0), randomization at an early stage in the development of the technology, and long-term follow-up for late toxicity. We implemented R-IDEAL for clinical evaluation of a recent innovation in radiation oncology, the MRI-guided linear accelerator (MR-Linac). MR-Linac combines a radiotherapy linear accelerator with a 1.5-T MRI, aiming for improved targeting, dose escalation, and margin reduction, and is expected to increase the use of hypofractionation, improve tumor control, leading to higher cure rates and less toxicity. An international consortium, with participants from seven large cancer institutes from Europe and North America, has adopted the R-IDEAL framework to work toward coordinated, evidence-based introduction of the MR-Linac. R-IDEAL holds the promise for timely, evidence-based introduction of radiotherapy innovations with proven superior effectiveness, while preventing unnecessary exposure of patients to potentially harmful interventions.

Dataset Information

Technical requirements framework of hospital information systems: design and evaluation.

Publications

Technical requirements framework of hospital information systems: design and evaluation.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets