ACM Home Page
Please provide us with feedback. Feedback
Alternative strategies to interpretative information systems
Full text PdfPdf (741 KB)
Source Conference on Supporting Group Work archive
Proceedings of conference on Organizational computing systems table of contents
Milpitas, California, United States
Pages: 68 - 74  
Year of Publication: 1995
ISBN:0-89791-706-5
Author
Gail Louw  Institute of Cancer Research, 15 Cotswold Road, Belmont, Surrey, United Kingdom
Sponsors
IFIP WG 8.4 : IFIP WG 8.4
SIGGROUP: ACM Special Interest Group on Supporting Group Work
IEEE-CS\TCOS : TC on Operating Systems & Application Environments
Publisher
ACM  New York, NY, USA
Bibliometrics
Downloads (6 Weeks): 4,   Downloads (12 Months): 14,   Citation Count: 0
Additional Information:

abstract   references   index terms  

Tools and Actions: Request Permissions Request Permissions    Review this Article  
DOI Bookmark: Use this link to bookmark this Article: http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/224019.224026
What is a DOI?

ABSTRACT

The relentless move to computerisation in the National Health Service in the United Kingdom (NHS) is challenged in this paper. The distinction between two types of information is defined: proceduralised and interpretative. An alternative to the latter is presented that relies on a change in organisational structure in the form of a self contained unit. This effectively reduces the need to process information. The unit, based on the principles of Patient Focused Care, provide multiskilled teams using a combination of multi-disciplinary documentation and protocols of care to ensure effective communication takes place without the use of interpretative information systems.


REFERENCES

Note: OCR errors may be found in this Reference List extracted from the full text article. ACM has opted to expose the complete List rather than only correct and linked references.

 
1
HERG,(i (1989) Mapping RM l-Icalth Scrvices Management 1)ec 1989
 
2
 
3
Bloomfield. B Coomhs. R ()vcen. J (I 992)'l.'op.f)ov,'n - Bottom {tp 'l'hc I-Icallh Scrvice Jotmml. 6 }:ebruarx' 1992
 
4
Bloomfield. 13 Coombs. R ()\x'cn. J (19911).-lct'otntting/iw I'ICT Policy l'apcr !1). WSRC 199{}
 
5
Rector. AI.. Noxx'lan. WA Kay', S t to\,,kms. TJ )1993) A l?amcv,'ork Ibr modcllino the elcctmnic medical record in Methods of Inlbnnalion in Medicines 32:II)9-119
 
6
Walsham. (i (1993) lnlt't?,'t'liltg h//bl~naliolt .~'~'slem.s' ht O~'ganizatioll.s'. Wile\'
 
7
 
8
Galbraith. J (I 9771} ()/xanizalion l)cxig,. Addison-Wesley
 
9
Booz Allen Hamilton (t988) ()peJ'atiouai Re.s'l/'ttclttt'ing -..l Recilw/br Success. l leallh Care Viewpoint. London. 13ooz Allen ltalnilton.
 
10
Lathrop., JP (t993) Resn~wtul'ing {/eahh ('at'e: The }'at/cut
 
11
Galbraith. J (1977) ()i'ganization Design. Addison-Wesley. Page 85
 
12
Zuboff, S (t 988) 7he Smart :\lachitte
 
13
Sparks. 1) (I 994) 'l'hc Carc Management Pathxva'~'. notcs Ii'om the IPC project team. In~hottsc paper, lOrighton Itcallh Care
 
14
Integrated thdient Care Team (I 993). lnlegrctled }~atie~/l ('al'e at th'ightolt th'alth ('ai'e.' "th'iJtgi,g ('a/'e to your Bedside" Planing atut !)esigtt: I)hase End Report. In-house publication August 1993
 
15
Kelly, J Rawlinson. C and Whittlcslonc. I'(1993) l'aticntlbcused-carc - built to last or tt'ds year's model in I3ritish Hospital Malmgcmcnl 1994 The Annual Review of British Hospital and Health Care Harming and Development