Quality of Healthcare: The Role of Informatics

T. Bürkle

doi:10.1055/s-0038-1638155

Yearbook of Medical Informatics, Table of Contents

Yearb Med Inform 2003; 12(01): 235-239
DOI: 10.1055/s-0038-1638155

Synopsis

Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart

Quality of Healthcare: The Role of Informatics

T. Bürkle

¹Department of Medical Informatics and Biomathematics University of Münster Münster, Germany

› Author Affiliations

Abstract

Full Text

References

References
1 Pipberger HV., Arms RJ., Stallmann FW.. Automated Screening of normal and abnormal electrocardiograms by means of a digital computer. Proc Soc Exp Biol Med 1961; 106: 130-2.
2 Warner HR., Olmsted CM., Ritherford BD.. HELP, a program for medical decision making. Comp Biomed Res 1972; 5: 65-74.
3 Evans RS., Pestotnik SL., Classen DC., Horn SD., Bass SP., Burke JP.. Preventing adverse drug events in hospitalized patients. Ann Pharmacother 1994; 28: 523-7.
4 Evans RS., Pestotnik SL., Gardner RM.. Evaluating the impact of computer-based drug monitoring on the quality and cost of drug therapy. In Prokosch HU., Dudeck J.. editors Hospital information systems: Design and development characteristics; Impact and future architectures. Elsevier. 1995: 201-20.
5 McDonald CJ.. Protocol-based computer reminders, the quality of care and the nonperfectability of man. N Engl J Med 1976; 295: 1351-5.
6 De Dombal FT., Leaper DJ., Staniland JR., McCann AP., Horrocks JC.. Computer – aided diagnosis of acute abdominal pain. BMJ 1972; 2: 9-13.
7 Adlassnig KP., Horak W.. Development and retrospective evaluation of HEPAXPERT-I: a routinely-used expert system for interpretive analysis of hepatitis A and B serologic findings. Artif Intell Med 1995; 7: 1-24.
8 Johnston ME., Langton KB., Haynes RB., Mathieu A.. Effects of computer-based clinical decision support systems on clinician performance and patient outcome. Ann Intern Med 1994; 120: 135-42.
9 Balas EA., Austin SM., Mitchel JA., Ewigmann BG., Bopp KD., Brown GD.. The clinical value of computerized information services. A review of 98 randomized clinical trials. Arch Fam Med 1996; 5: 271-8.
10 Petrucci K., Petrucci P., Canfield K., McCormick KA., Kjerulff K., Parks P.. Evaluation of UNIS: Urological Nursing Information System. Proceedings Fifteenth Annual Symposium on Computer Applications in Healthcare SCAMC. 1992: 43-7.
11 White RH., Hong R., Venook AP., Daschbach MM., Murray W., Mungall DR.. et al. Initiation of warfarin therapy: comparison of physician dosing with computer assisted dosing. J Gen Intern Med 1989; 2: 141-8.
12 Bates DW., Cohen M., Leape LL., Overhage M., Shabot MM., Sheridan T.. Reducing the frequency of errors in medicine using information Technology. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2001; 8: 299-308.
13 Kohn LT., Corrigan JM., Donaldson MS.. editors To Err is Human: Building a Safer Health System. Washington DC: National Academic Press; 1999
14 Institute for Safe Medication Practices. Over-reliance on computer systems may place patients at great risk. ISMP Medication Safety Alert , Feb 10, 1999. Huntingdon Valley, Pa: ISMP; 1999
15 Van Bemmel JH., Musen MA.. editors Handbook of Medical Informatics. Heidelberg: Springer; 1997
16 Vasallo DJ., Hoque F., Farquharson R., Patterson V., Swinfen P., Swinfen R.. An evaluation of the first years’s experience with a low-cost telemedicine link in Bangladesh. J Telemed Telecare 2001; 7: 125-38.
17 van’t Riet A., Berg M., Hiddema F., Sol K.. Meeting patients’ needs with patient information systems: potential benefits of qualitative research methods. Int J Med Inf 2001; 64: 1-14.
18 Roine R., Ohinmaa A., Hailey D.. Assessing telemedicine: a systematic review of the literature. Can Med Assoc J 2001; 165 (06) 765-71.
19 Ohmann C., Boy O., Eich HP.. Arbeitskreis Evaluation im MEDWIS-Programm. Leitfaden zur Evaluierung von wissensbasierten Systemen. Informatik, Biometrie und Epidemiologie in Medizin und Biologie 1998; 29: 77-83.
20 Ohmann C., Boy O., Yang Q.. A systematic approach to the assessment of user satisfaction with health care systems: constructs, models and instruments. Stud Health Technol Inform 1997; 43 Pt B 781-5.
21 Kaplan B.. Addressing Organizational Issues into the Evaluation of Medical Systems. J Am Med Inform Assoc 1997; 4: 94-101.
22 Bürkle T., Ammenwerth E., Prokosch HU., Dudeck J.. Evaluation of clinical Information Systems - What can be evaluated and what cannot ?. J Eval Clin Pract 2001; Nov 7 (04) 373-85.
23 Ammenwerth E., Kaiser F., Bürkle T., Gräber S., Herrmann G., Wilhelmy I.. Evaluation of User Acceptance of Data Management Systems in Hospitals - Feasibility and Usability. In Brown A., Remenyi D.. editors Proceedings of the 9th European Conference on Information Technology Evaluation (ECITE)2002. Paris Reading: MCIL; 2002: 31-8.
24 Sackett DL., Richardson WS., Rosenberg W., Haynes RB.. Evidence Based Medicine – How to practice and teach EBM. Churchill Livingstone. 1997
25 Perleth M., Antes G.. Evidenz-basierte Medizin. München: MMV Medizin Verlag; 1998
26 Miller R., Gardner R.. Recommendations for responsible monitoring and regulation of clinical software systems. J Am Med Inform Assoc 1997; 4: 442-57.
27 The Cochrane Library http://www.cochrane.org
28 Walton RT., Harvey E., Dovey S., Freemantle N.. Computerised advice on drug dosage to improve prescribing practice (Cochrane Review). In The Cochrane Library, Issue 3/2002. Oxford: Update Software.;
29 California Senate Bill No. 1875. Chapter 816, Statutes of 2000 http://www.mederrors.com/pdf/SB1875.pdf