Refine
Year of publication
- 2016 (13) (remove)
Document Type
- Article (8)
- Conference Proceeding (5)
Is part of the Bibliography
- yes (13)
Institute
- Fakultät WiSo (13) (remove)
The TIGER Initiative
(2016)
Benchmarking, sprich die Vergleichsanalyse von Prozessen mit festgelegtem Bezugswert, findet zunehmend Einzug in die Welt der Gesundheits-IT. Dabei spielen jedoch viele Faktoren zusammen, die einen einfachen Vergleich von IT-Kosten bei Weitem übersteigen. Eine Forschungsgruppe der Hochschule Osnabrück hat mit dem IT-Benchmark Gesundheitswesen ein Analysetool vorgelegt, das auch einen Länder- vergleich ermöglicht.
Dienstleister oder Diktator?
(2016)
Die IT in der Rolle eines Dienstleisters zu sehen, ist an unseren Krankenhäusern leider selten Realität. Denn der IT-Diktator zieht gerne in Form überbordender IT-gestützter Dokumentation durch die Arzt- und Stationszimmer. Das sei dann dem „Diktat der DRG" geschuldet, so die Begründung. Aber muss das so sein?
Innovation braucht Freiraum
(2016)
Innovationen sind positiv besetzt. Deshalb reicht es nicht aus, dass etwas „neu“ ist, es muss „innovativ“ sein. Viele verbinden das mit etwas Sensationellem, das große Aufmerksamkeit auf sich lenkt und das revolutionäre Veränderungen mit sich bringt – am besten schlagartig. Gerne werden auch alle technischen Neuerungen als Innovationen bezeichnet. Aber stimmt das denn auch?
Background: Clinical information logistics is the backbone of care workflows inside and outside of hospitals. Due to the great potential of health IT to support clinical processes its contribution needs to be regularly monitored and governed. IT benchmarks are a well-known instrument to optimise the availability and use of IT by guiding the decision making process. The aim of this study was to translate IT benchmarking results that were grounded on a hierarchical workflow scoring system into an appropriate visualisation concept.
Methods: To this end, a three-dimensional multi-level model was developed, which allowed the decomposition of the highly aggregated workflow composite score into score views for the individual clinical workflows concerned and for the descriptors of these workflows. Furthermore this multi-level model helped to break down the score views into single and multiple indicator views.
Results: The results could be visualised per hospital in comparison to the results of organisations of similar size and ownership (peer reference groups) and in comparison to different types of innovation adopters. The multi-level model was implemented in a benchmark of 199 hospitals and evaluated by the chief information officers. The evaluation resulted in high ratings for the comprehensibility of the different types of views of the scores and indicators.
Conclusions: The implementation of the multi-level model in a large benchmark of hospitals proved to be feasible and useful in terms of the overall structure and the different indicator views. There seems to be a preference for less complex and familiar views.
Innovations are typically characterised by their relative newness for the user. In order for new eHealth applications to be accepted as innovations more criteria were proposed including “use” and “usability”. The handoverEHR is a new approach that allows the user to translate the essentials of a clinical case into a graphical representation, the so-called cognitive map of the patient. This study aimed at testing the software usability. A convenience sample of 23 experienced nurses from different healthcare organisations across the country rated the usability of the handoverEHR after performing typical handover tasks. All usability scales of the IsoMetricsL questionnaire showed positive values (4 “I agree”) with the exception of “error tolerance” (3 “neutral statement”). A significant improvement was found in self-descriptiveness as compared to an initial usability testing prior to this study. Different subgroups of users tended to rate the usability of the system differently. This study demonstrated the benefits of formative evaluations in terms of improving the usability of an entirely new approach. It thus helps to transform a novel piece of software towards becoming a real innovation. Our findings also hint at the importance of user characteristics that could affect the usability ratings.
Informatics competencies of the health care workforce must meet the requirements of inter-professional process and outcome oriented provision of care. In order to help nursing education transform accordingly, the TIGER Initiative deployed an international survey, with participation from 21 countries, to evaluate and prioritise a broad list of core competencies for nurses in five domains: 1) nursing management, 2) information technology (IT) management in nursing, 3) interprofessional coordination of care, 4) quality management, and 5) clinical nursing. Informatics core competencies were found highly important for all domains. In addition, this project compiled eight national cases studies from Austria, Finland, Germany, Ireland, New Zealand, the Philippines, Portugal, and Switzerland that reflected the country specific perspective. These findings will lead us to an international framework of informatics recommendations.
An Iterative Methodology for Developing National Recommendations for Nursing Informatics Curricula
(2016)
The increasing importance of IT in nursing requires educational measures to support its meaningful application. However, many countries do not yet have national recommendations for nursing informatics competencies. We thus developed an iterative triple methodology to yield validated and country specific recommendations for informatics core competencies in nursing. We identified relevant competencies from national sources (step 1), matched and enriched these with input from the international literature (step 2) and fed the resulting 24 core competencies into a survey (120 invited experts from which 87 responded) and two focus group sessions with a total of 48 experts (steps 3a/3b). The subsequent focus group sessions confirmed and expanded the findings. As a result, we were able to define role specific informatics core competencies for three countries.