PDF herunterladen
CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 · Yearb Med Inform 2018; 27(01): 083-090
DOI: 10.1055/s-0038-1667075
Section 3: Clinical Information Systems
Survey
Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart

Recent Advancement of Clinical Information Systems: Opportunities and Challenges

Md. Mohaimenul Islam
1   Graduate Institute of Biomedical Informatics, College of Medical Science and Technology, Taipei Medical University, Taipei, Taiwan
2   International Center for Health Information Technology, Taipei Medical University, Taipei, Taiwan
,
Tahmina Nasrin Poly
1   Graduate Institute of Biomedical Informatics, College of Medical Science and Technology, Taipei Medical University, Taipei, Taiwan
2   International Center for Health Information Technology, Taipei Medical University, Taipei, Taiwan
,
Yu-Chuan Jack Li
1   Graduate Institute of Biomedical Informatics, College of Medical Science and Technology, Taipei Medical University, Taipei, Taiwan
2   International Center for Health Information Technology, Taipei Medical University, Taipei, Taiwan
3   TMU Research Center of Cancer Translational Medicine, Taipei, Taiwan
› Institutsangaben
Weitere Informationen

Publikationsverlauf

Publikationsdatum:
29. August 2018 (online)

   Lizenzen und Reprints

Summary

Objectives: Clinical information systems (CISs) have generated opportunities for meaningful improvements both in patient care and workflow but there is still a long way to perfection. Healthcare providers are still facing challenges of data exchange, management, and integration due to lack of functionality among these systems. Our objective here is to systematically review, synthesize, and summarize the literature that describes the current stage of clinical information systems, so as to assess the current state of knowledge, and identify benefits and challenges.

Methods: PubMed, EMBASE, and the bibliographies of articles were searched for studies published until September 1, 2017, which reported on significant advancement of clinical information systems, as well as problems and opportunities in this field. Studies providing the most detailed information were included and the others were kept only as references.

Results: We selected 23 papers out of 1,026 unique abstracts for full-text review using our selection criteria, and 20 out of these 23 studies met all of our inclusion criteria. We focused on three major areas: 1) Ambulatory and inpatients clinical information systems; 2) Specialty information systems; and 3) Ancillary information systems. As CIS can support evidence-based practices that, in turn, improve patient's safety, quality and efficacy of care, advancement, acceptability, and adaptability of CIS have increased worldwide. Although, the demand for CIS functionality is rising fast, current CISs still have data integration challenges and lack of functionality to exchange patient information from all or some parts of the healthcare system. These limitations can be attributed to technical, human, and organizational factors

Conclusion: Clinical information systems provide tremendous opportunities to reduce clinical errors such as medication errors and diagnostic errors and to support healthcare professionals by offering up-to-date patient information. They promise to improve workflow and efficiency of care, thus boosting the overall quality of healthcare.

Keywords

Clinical Information System - Electronic Medical Record - Hospital Information System - Computerized Provider Order Entry
 

  • References

  • 1 Graber ML. The incidence of diagnostic error in medicine. BMJ Qual Saf 2013; Oct;22 Suppl 2: ii21-ii27
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Andel C, Davidow SL, Hollander M, Moreno DA. The economics of health care quality and medical errors. Journal Health Care Finance 2012; 39 (01) 39-50
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Makary MA, Daniel M. Medical error-the third leading cause of death in the US. BMJ 2016; 353: i2139
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Doebbeling BN, Chou AF, Tierney WM. Priorities and Strategies for the Implementation of Integrated Informatics and Communications Technology to Improve Evidence-Based Practice. J Gen Intern Med 2006; 21 (Suppl 2) S50-7
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Mackel J, Farris H, Mittman B, Wilkes M, Kanouse D. A Windows-based tool for the study of clinical decision-making. MEDINFO 1995; 8 Pt2: 1687
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Kushniruk AW, Patel VL. Cognitive and usability engineering methods for the evaluation of clinical information systems. J Biomed Inform 2004; 37 (01) 56-76
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Balaraman P, Kosalram K. E-Hospital Management & Hospital Information Systems-Changing Trends. International Journal of Information Engineering and Electronic Business 2013; 5: 50
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Moen A, Maeland Knudsen LM. Nursing informatics: decades of contribution to health informatics. Healthc Inform Res 2013; 19 (02) 86-92
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Kavanagh KT, Cimiotti JP, Abusalem S, Coty MB. Moving Healthcare Quality Forward With Nursing-Sensitive Value-Based Purchasing. J Nurs Scholarsh 2012; 44 (04) 385-95
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Paré G, Sicotte C, Jacques H. The effects of creating psychological ownership on physicians’ acceptance of clinical information systems. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2006; 13: 197-205
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Haux R. Health information systems–past, present, future. Int J Med Inform 2006; 75: 268-81
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. Int J Surg 2010; 8 (05) 336-41
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Ngafeeson MN. Healthcare Information Systems Opportunities and Challenges; Encyclopedia of Information Science and Technology, Third Edition. IGI Global; 2015. p. 3387–95
    Google Scholar
  • 14 Petrides AK, Tanasijevic MJ, Goonan EM, Landman AB, Kantartjis M, Bates DW. , et al. Top ten challenges when interfacing a laboratory information system to an electronic health record: Experience at a large academic medical center. Int J Med Inform 2017; 106: 9-16
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Zeng X. The impacts of electronic health record implementation on the health care workforce. N. C. Med J 2016; 77 (02) 112-4
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Feero WG, Bigley MB, Brinner KM. New standards and enhanced utility for family health history information in the electronic health record: an update from the American Health Information Community’s Family Health History Multi-Stakeholder Workgroup. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2008; 15 (06) 723-8
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Kimball BC, Nowakowski KE, Maschke KJ, McCormick JB. Genomic data in the electronic medical record: Perspectives from a biobank community advisory board. J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics 2014; 9 (05) 16-24
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Evans R. Electronic Health Records: Then, Now, and in the Future. Yearb Med Inform 2016; Suppl 1: S48-61
    Artikel in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Evans RS, Carlson R, Johnson KV, Palmer BK, Lloyd JF. Enhanced notification of infusion pump programming errors. Stud Health Technol Inform 2010; 160: 734-8
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Nuckols TK, Smith-Spangler C, Morton SC, Asch SM, Patel VM, Anderson LJ. , et al. The effectiveness of computerized order entry at reducing preventable adverse drug events and medication errors in hospital settings: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Syst Rev 2014; 3: 56
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Elsaid KA, Garguilo S, Collins CM. Chemotherapy e-prescribing: opportunities and challenges. Integr Pharm Res Pract 2015; 4: 39-48
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Forrester SH, Hepp Z, Roth JA, Wirtz HS, Devine EB. Cost-effectiveness of a computerized provider order entry system in improving medication safety ambulatory care. Value Health 2014; 17 (04) 340-9
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Klein L. Implementing an Advanced Computerized Provider Order Entry System to the Neonatal Intensive Care Using Kotter’s Change Management Model. Canadian Journal of Nursing Informatics 2013; 8
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Mador RL, Shaw NT. The impact of a Critical Care Information System (CCIS) on time spent charting and in direct patient care by staff in the ICU: a review of the literature. Int J Med Inform 2009; 78: 435-45
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Ehteshami A, Sadoughi F, Ahmadi M, Kashefi P. Intensive care information system impacts. Acta Inform Med 2013; 21 (03) 185-91
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Levesque E, Hoti E, de La Serna S, Habouchi H, Ichai P, Saliba FS. , et al. The positive financial impact of using an Intensive Care Information System in a tertiary Intensive Care Unit. Int J Med Inform 2013; 82: 177-84
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Bosman R, Rood E, Oudemans van Straaten H, Van der Spoel J, Wester J, Zandstra D. Intensive care information system reduces documentation time of the nurses after cardiothoracic surgery. Intensive Care Med 2003; 29: 83-90
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Levesque E, Hoti E, Azoulay D, Ichai P, Samuel D, Saliba F. The implementation of an Intensive Care Information System allows shortening the ICU length of stay. J Clin Monit Comput 2015; 29 (02) 263-9
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Fraenkel D. Clinical information systems in intensive care. Critical Care Resusc 1999; 1 (02) 173
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 30 McFarlane A, Wielgosz A. Strengthening information systems for heart health in Canada. Can J Cardiol 2009; 25 (11) 631-4
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 31 Nolan PG. Planned implementation of an integrated Cardiovascular Information System in an Acute Hospital Group. [Masters dissertation]. Dublin: Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland; 2015
    PubMed
  • 32 Simoons M, van der Putten N, Wood D, Bassand JP, Boersma E. The Cardiology Information System: the need for data standards for integration of systems for patient care, registries and guidelines for clinical practice. Eur Heart J 2002; 23 (15) 1148-52
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 33 Dahl R. Radiation Oncology Networking and Information Systems. American Association of Physicists in Medicine Annual Meeting; 2002 https://www.aapm.org/meetings/02am/pdf/7620-72080.pdf
    PubMed
  • 34 Evans W, Ashbury FD, Hogue G, Smith A, Pun J. Implementing a regional oncology information system: approach and lessons learned. Curr Oncol 2014; 21 (05) 224-33
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 35 de los Santos LEF, Herman MG. Radiation oncology information systems and clinical practice compatibility: Workflow evaluation and comprehensive assessment. Pract Radiat Oncol 2012; 2 (04) e155-e164
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 36 Messados KV. Information technology in medicine. A structure analysis of a picture archive communication system (PACS) and a top down description of such a system in Hellenic University Hospital; 2014
    PubMed
  • 37 Nyathi T, Colyer C, Bhardwaj AK, Rijken J, Morton J. Post-upgrade testing on a radiotherapy oncology information system with an embedded record and verify system following the IAEA Human Health Report No. 7 recommendations. Phys Med 2016; 32 (06) 854-8
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 38 Zhang J, Lu X, Nie H, Huang Z, van der Aalst WM. Radiology information system: a workflow- based approach. Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg 2009; 4 (05) 509-16
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 39 Pereira AG, Vergara LG, Merino EAD, Wagner A. Solutions in radiology services management: a literature review. Radiol Bras 2015; 48 (05) 298-304
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 40 Bidgood Jr WD, Horii SC, Prior FW, Van Syckle DE. Understanding and using DICOM, the data interchange standard for biomedical imaging. J Am Med Inform Assoc 1997; 4: 199-212
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 41 Nance Jr JW, Meenan C, Nagy PG. The future of the radiology information system. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2013; 200 (05) 1064-70
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 42 Clunie DA, Dennison DK, Cram D, Persons KR, Bronkalla MD. Technical Challenges of Enterprise Imaging: HIMSS-SIIM Collaborative White Paper. J Digit Imaging 2016; 29 (05) 583-614
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 43 Sepulveda JL, Young DS. The ideal laboratory information system. Arch Pathol Lab Med 2013; 137 (08) 1129-40
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 44 Lukiæ V. Laboratory Information System–Where are We Today?. J Med Biochem 2017
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 45 McCudden CR, Henderson M. Laboratory information system data extraction and re-use: opportunities and challenges. J Lab Precis Med 2017; 2
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 46 Birkner CC, Eldahdah EG, Kirkland HA, Martinez DF. Computerized laboratory information management system. . Google Patents; 2004
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 47 Blaya JA, Shin SS, Yagui MJ, Yale G, Suarez CZ, Asencios LL. , et al. A web-based laboratory information system to improve quality of care of tuberculosis patients in Peru: functional requirements, implementation and usage statistics. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak 2007; 7: 33
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 48 Mahalli AE, Sahar H, Yamani W. Assessment of pharmacy information system performance in three hospitals in Eastern Province, Saudi Arabia. Perspect Health Inf Manag 2016; 13
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 49 Woods SS, Schwartz E, Tuepker A, Press NA, Nazi KM, Turvey CL. , et al. Patient experiences with full electronic access to health records and clinical notes through the My HealtheVet Personal Health Record Pilot: qualitative study. J Med Internet Res 2013; 15 (03) e65
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 50 Lakbala P, Dindarloo K. Physicians’ perception and attitude toward electronic medical record. Springerplus 2014; 3: 63
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 51 Bowens FM, Frye PA, Jones WA. Health information technology: integration of clinical workflow into meaningful use of electronic health records. Perspect Health Inf Manag 2010; 7: 1d
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 52 Garg AX, Adhikari NK, McDonald H, Rosas-Arellano MP, Devereaux P, Beyene J. , et al. Effects of computerized clinical decision support systems on practitioner performance and patient outcomes: a systematic review. JAMA 2005; 293: 1223-38
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 53 Mahmoud E, Rice G. Information systems technology and healthcare quality improvement. Review of Business 1998; 19: 8
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 54 Wright A, Sittig DF. SANDS: a service-oriented architecture for clinical decision support in a National Health Information Network. J Biomed Inform 2008; 41: 962-81
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar