Towards formal medical reporting: An evaluation in endoscopy

For clinical practice, the patient record is the principal repository for information concerning a patient's health care. For centuries, medical notes were brief comments used by their author to trigger a fuller recollection of his patients. In the late nineteenth century, physicians stalied to document their findings and actions in personal ledgers. The concept of a single record per patient was introduced in 1907. A proposal in the I920s to enforce physicians to document sets of essential data met with much resistance. Since then, the complexity and volume of medical data increased, and specialization led to more health-care workers per patient. As a result, the way data are recorded, processed, retrieved, and communicated became ever more crucial in medical practice. Neveliheless, the patient record underwent very little change. However, it is now generally accepted that the traditional paper patient record can no longer fulfill the expanding demands for information. As an alternative, the computer-based patient record (CPR) increasingly gains interest. The Institute of Medicine (USA) even considers the CPR to be essential for the full maturation of the scientific basis of health care

Cholgate - a randomized controlled trial comparing the effect of automated and on-demand decision support on the management of cardiovascular disease factors in primary care

Automated and on-demand decision support systems integrated into an electronic medical record have proven to be an effective implementation strategy for guidelines. Cholgate is a randomized controlled trial comparing the effect of automated and on-demand decision support on the management of cardiovascular disease factors in primary care

Involving the patient: A prospective study on use, appreciation and effectiveness of an information system in head and neck cancer care

Objective: To determine use, appreciation and effectiveness of an electronic health information support system in head and neck (H&N) cancer care. Design: A prospective evaluation study. The evaluated system has four different functions: (1) communication amongst health care providers and between health care providers and patients, (2) information for health care providers and patients, (3) contact with fellow sufferers and (4) monitoring of discharged patients by means of electronic questionnaires. Evaluation of the system was done both objectively using automatically created log files and stored messages, and subjectively by using paper questionnaires from patients and general practitioners (GPs). Setting: Department of Otorhinolaryngology and Head and Neck Surgery of a tertiary health care centre in the Netherlands. The system was put at patients' disposal for a period of 6 weeks following discharge from the hospital after surgery for H&N cancer, and was additional to standard care. Participants: Head and neck cancer patients, hospital physicians, members of a hospital-based support team, GPs, district nurses and speech therapists. Main outcome measures: Actual use of the system by patients and health care providers. Patients' appreciation for each of the system's four different functions. GPs' appreciation for the system. Capability to detect potential patient problems with the system. Results: The system was used by 36 H&N cancer patients, 10 hospital physicians, 2 members of the support team, 8 GPs, 2 district nurses and 2 speech therapists. The total number of patient-sessions was 982: an average of 27.3 sessions per patient during the 6 weeks study period. In total, 456 monitoring questionnaires were completed. The support team in hospital responded with 231 actions. In 16 cases, an extra appointment was made for a patient with the hospital physician. Out of these cases, immediate action was considered necessary eight times. Patients appreciated the system highly, rating it with an average score of 8.0 on a 10-point scale. All patients used the monitoring function, and rated 'monitoring' with a mean score of 8.0 on a 10-point scale. Least used and appreciated was the 'contact with fellow sufferers' function. Only 8 out of possible 36 GPs used the system, rating it with an average of 5.6 on a 10-point scale. Conclusions: The electronic health information support system was used intensively and highly appreciated by H&N cancer patients. The system enabled the early detection of occurring health problems that required direct intervention. ICT can play an additional role in the management of patients, also in a relatively elderly and computer illiterate patient population