Refine
Document Type
- Article (2)
Language
- English (2) (remove)
Has Fulltext
- no (2) (remove)
Is part of the Bibliography
- yes (2)
Institute
- Fakultät WiSo (2)
While Nursing Informatics competencies seem essential for the daily work of nurses, they are not formally integrated into nursing education in Austria, Germany and Switzerland, nor are there any national educational recommendations. The aim of this paper is to show how such recommendations can be developed, what competency areas are most relevant in the three countries and how the recommendations can be implemented in practice. To this end, a triple iterative procedure was proposed and applied starting with national health informatics recommendations for other professionals, matching and enriching these findings with topics from the international literature and finally validating them in an expert survey with 87 experts and in focus group sessions. Out of the 24 compiled competency areas, the relevance ratings of the following four recommended areas achieved values above 90%: nursing documentation (including terminologies), principles of nursing informatics, data protection and security, and quality assurance and quality management. As there were no significant differences between the three countries, these findings laid the foundation of the DACH Recommendations of Nursing Informatics as joint German (D), Austrian (A), and Swiss (CH) recommendations in Nursing Informatics. The methodology proposed has been utilized internationally, which demonstrates the added value of this study also outside the confines of Austria, Germany, Switzerland.
Objective: The more people there are who use clinical information systems (CIS) beyond their traditional intramural confines, the more promising the benefits are, and the more daunting the risks will be. This review thus explores the areas of ethical debates prompted by CIS conceptualized as smart systems reaching out to patients and citizens. Furthermore, it investigates the ethical competencies and education needed to use these systems appropriately.
Methods: A literature review covering ethics topics in combination with clinical and health information systems, clinical decision support, health information exchange, and various mobile devices and media was performed searching the MEDLINE database for articles from 2016 to 2019 with a focus on 2018 and 2019. A second search combined these keywords with education.
Results: By far, most of the discourses were dominated by privacy, confidentiality, and informed consent issues. Intertwined with confidentiality and clear boundaries, the provider-patient relationship has gained much attention. The opacity of algorithms and the lack of explicability of the results pose a further challenge. The necessity of sociotechnical ethics education was underpinned in many studies including advocating education for providers and patients alike. However, only a few publications expanded on ethical competencies. In the publications found, empirical research designs were employed to capture the stakeholders’ attitudes, but not to evaluate specific implementations.
Conclusion: Despite the broad discourses, ethical values have not yet found their firm place in empirically rigorous health technology evaluation studies. Similarly, sociotechnical ethics competencies obviously need detailed specifications. These two gaps set the stage for further research at the junction of clinical information systems and ethics.