Clinical decision support software for management of chronic heart failure: development and evaluation.

OBJECTIVE: To develop and evaluate clinical decision support software (CDSS) to aid physicians treat patients with chronic heart failure (CHF). METHODS: The CDSS was developed after discussions with a multidisciplinary panel. Evaluation was performed in three stages over a 6 month period including an editorial check, one-to-one interviews with potential users and educational meetings with general practitioners (GPs), junior doctors and medical students during which the CDSS was assessed in a cross-over design against paper guidelines. Opinions of the CDSS and the computer literacy of the participants were assessed by questionnaire. RESULTS: There were several changes to the CDSS at various stages of development and evaluation. One-to-one interviews generated extensive qualitative feedback. GPs had lower computer literacy scores than junior doctors and students (both p<0.01). There were small trends when comparing the CDSS with paper guidelines. GPs scored less well (CDSS 75% vs. 80%, p=0.41), while junior doctors and medical students appeared to improve their scores (72%-84%, p=0.32 and 66%-77%, p=0.19, respectively). Most (70%) found the CDSS more useful than the written guidelines. CONCLUSION: Development of CDSS using guidelines and expert opinion requires a multidisciplinary iterative process of feedback and software adaptation. Barriers to implementation identified include lower computer literacy among GPs, a lack of complexity within CDSS in addressing non-medical needs of patients and a reluctance among medical staff to consult guidelines during patient consultations. Improving computer skills, integrating CDSS into referral pathways and requests for investigations may be ways of enhancing use of this emerging technology.

Healthcare information giving services: technologies and everyday practicalities.

This paper presents findings from observational studies of work practice in two 'information giving' services - a poisons information service and a mental health helpline - as a precursor to informing the design of such services. Our work high- lights the interactions that constitute the requesting and giving of information and the role of intermediaries in the delivery of recipient-designed information. We propose a shift of focus from the logic of information in system design to one that encompasses the practicalities of information giving.

Designing for e-Health: recurring scenarios in developing grid-based medical imaging systems.

The paper draws on a number of Grid projects, particularly on the experience of NeuroGrid, a UK project in the Neurosciences tasked with developing a Grid-based collaborative research environment to support the sharing of digital images and patient data across multiple distributed sites. It outlines recurrent socio-technical issues, highlighting the challenges of scaling up technological networks in advance of the regulatory networks which normally regulate their use in practice.

Working IT out in e-Science: experiences of requirements capture in a HealthGrid project.

This paper reports on our experiences of being involved in requirements capture for a HealthGrid project. Large scale, collaborative projects with multiple partners tend to experience numerous problems in the requirements capture phase (and often beyond) and HealthGrid projects are no exception. Projects with highly innovative objectives often have additional sets of problematics, however. In carving out new visions of, for example, clinical research and healthcare service delivery, HealthGrid projects have to reckon with--and work within--existing healthcare policy, legislative frameworks, professional cultures and organisational politics as well as the more common integration problem of dealing with legacy systems. Such factors are not conducive to the achievement in healthcare of the e-Science vision of seamless integration of information and collaborative working across administrative, professional and organisational boundaries. In this paper, we document some of the challenges we encountered in investigating the requirements for eDiaMoND, a flagship pilot UK e-Science project. We discuss what we might learn from these challenges, especially approaches to requirements capture that are appropriate for projects with innovative aims and are also sensitive to representing and addressing what may be complex professional and organisational interests.

Professional and patient attitudes to using mobile phone technology to monitor asthma: questionnaire survey.

AIMS: There is increasing international interest in using emerging technologies to enhance chronic disease management. We aimed to explore the attitudes of patients and primary care professionals to using mobile technology in order to monitor asthma. METHODS: A piloted questionnaire containing closed and open-ended questions assessing attitudes to using electronic self-monitoring was posted to a random sample of general practitioners, asthma nurses, and people with asthma (12 years and over) in Lothian and Kent, UK, with 2 reminders. In addition to descriptive statistics, patient and clinician responses were compared using Chi-squared or independent sample t-tests. Free-text responses were analysed thematically. RESULTS: Responses were obtained from 130/300 professionals (43%) and 202/389 patients (52%). Patients rated the technology positively and considered that it may help clinicians to provide care, especially during acute attacks. Although rated similarly, professionals were more sceptical about benefits. Both professionals and patients had concerns about the time and cost implications. Of the respondents, 28 professionals (10%) and 62 patients (16%) returned uncompleted questionnaires citing lack of perceived relevance. CONCLUSIONS: The low completion rate probably reflects the current status of mobile phone-facilitated care as a minority interest for 'early adopters' of technology. Even for the enthusiastic minority, using mobile phone technology raised questions of clinical benefit, impact on self-management, and concerns about workload and cost, which will need to be addressed prior to wider acceptance.