Survey
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
ICU Clinical Information Management System An Investigation for a Pediatric Intensive Care Unit Steven Sousa Ann Thompson Background • The patient record is a critical part of modern medical care • Patient data is rarely consolidated in a format that supports good and efficient decision making • As hospital care becomes more and more complex, the paper record becomes more and more inadequate “Putting it on Paper” • What efficiencies would be realized if a medical facility would go “paperless”? • Here are some interesting numbers for you: Percent of time that doctors, while taking a medical history, fail to note in the record the patients chief compliant Number of people at a hospital who need access to a patient’s medical record at a given time 27% 22% Number of paper medical records that a quality3 assurance staff can review per hour Number of automated medical records that a quality-assurance staff can review per hour 400 Percent of patients’ visits during which a doctor can’t get access to the patient’s medical record 30% Percent of hospital patients’ paper records that are incomplete 70% Percent of laboratory tests that have to be reordered because the results aren’t in patients’ records Percent of physicians’ time spent writing up patients’ charts Percent of nurses’ time spent writing up patients’ charts Weight of the average paper medical record (in lbs.) Percent of time a diagnosis isn’t recorded in a patient’s record 11% 38% 50% 1.5 40% Flowsheet Baby Paper chart The ICU Patient • ICU patients have rapidly changing disease, often on a background of complex chronic disorders, with life-threatening dysfunction of one or more vital organ systems • Patient management is increasingly complex • Average patient undergoes 12-25 laboratory tests per day, receives 5-15 different drugs, and 1-5 radiologic procedures Those Involved • Multiple physician specialists sub-specialists, nurses, respiratory therapists, pharmacists, and multiple other health professionals • Diagnosis typically involves extensive laboratory testing as well as radiologic procedures. • Treatment requires multiple pharmaceutical agents as well as extensive mechanical systems • Frequent reassessment requires immediate access to new information Respiratory therapist Respiratory chart ECMO technicians Nurse Bedside chart Primary chart Kardex Children’s Hospital • The Hospital is a 235 bed, private, • • • • independent, academic hospital affiliated with the University PICU complex is comprised of a 51 bed subset (20% of total beds) 2000 patients admitted a year Avg. length of stay is 6 days Total patients days is about 12,000 Current Situation • Current PICU data management • A Multiple paper charts for each patient • B Manual transfer of data from monitors, labs, etc to flowsheet • C Data analysis only by chart review • Children’s Hospital information systems • A Multiple systems specific to service (clinical laboratory, pharmacy, administration, etc) • B New installation of integration engine (Datagate) • C Limited ability to query any of the systems Children’s Hospital Info. System Hospital Information Systems ADT (SMS InVision) Pathology (CoPath) Laboratory (Sunquest) Radiology (APAQ) DATAGATE ICU Electronic Medical Record Pharmacy (Pharmnet) Individual system Integration engine (translator) Proposed PICU EMR Desired Outcomes • Integrate/Consolidate multiple paper charts and • • • • • • computerized databases Demographic data (ADT info) Integration with billing services Physiologic monitoring results Organ system support employed Laboratory, radiology, pathology testing results Pharmacy support (drug dosages, interactions, allergies, etc.) Desired Outcomes (Cont’d) • • • • • • Kardex function Integration with care paths Outcomes data for regulatory bodies Capability to display variety of outputs Adaptability to PICU Medical narrative: progress notes • Formatted v. free text (speech recognition) • Searchable text Vendors Analysis • Eclipsys • Ranking: 4.5 • Cost: $1,499,000 + • Clinicomp, International • Ranking: 3.9 • Cost: $ 989,750+ • Agilent Technologies • Ranking: (Incomplete) • Cost: $1,238,497 + Marketed Vendor Benefits • Automates multidisciplinary documentation • Establishes a “paperless record” • Provides real-time access to data and decision support • Minimizes duplicated data entry or potential handwriting errors • Alerts users at the point of care of possible mistakes or errors • Allows users to generate a complete audit trail Marketed Vendor Benefits • Interfaces to bedside instruments and • • • • monitors Integrates existing enterprise legacy systems Improves the continuity of care with patient care plans or clinical pathways Supports rapid information retrieval Supports clinical decision making Eclipsys monitor screens Gap Assessment • • • • • • • • • Benchmarking Outcomes Comparison Trend Analysis Speech Recognition Security (lacking information on adequacy of current features Free Text Retrieval Primitive Decision Support Capability Image Capability User Acceptance Recommendations • Current systems would provide an electronic equivalent of the current paper record, probably with less missing data – Doubt FTE savings – Little support for reducing other costs Recommendations • New features (which include decision support, knowledge-based orders, data mining and analysis) are being developed rapidly – – – – – Reduc errors Avoid redundancy Improve compliance with care paths Improve outcomes Increase awareness of costs Recommendations • Send out new RFP focused on data analysis and decision support • Delay purchase until this information is available