Download PDF
Yearb Med Inform 2009; 18(01): 33-36
DOI: 10.1055/s-0038-1638634
Original Article
Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart

“In the same Boat” – Considerations on the Partnership between Healthcare Providers and Manufacturers of Health IT Products and Medical Devices

B. Bergh
1   University Hospital Heidelberg, Center for Information Technology and Medical Engineering, Heidelberg, Germany
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

Publication Date:
07 March 2018 (online)

Also available at
   Permissions and Reprints

Summary

Objectives To assess the current culture of cooperation between healthcare providers (HCPs) and the healthcare industry (HCI) in the domain of Health-IT and Engineering (HITE) and identify possible strategies for improvement.

Methods Based on reports in the literature and personal experience, major challenges were identified, the current ways of cooperation defined and their relation to each other analyzed.

ResultsFour main challenges were identified for both sides involving: products and functionality, integration of IT-Systems with each other and with medical devices, usability, visions and strategic management. None of the four defined cooperation categories cover all aspects of the challenges, but cooperation in small, dedicated groups appeared to provide the most advantages. An increased participation of HCPs in standardization activities is crucial either directly or indirectly via professional or scientific organizations.

Conclusions Cooperation between provider management (hospitals, clinics or systems) and manufacturers of health IT products will be the key factor for success of the HCI while providing substantial benefits for providers. Both sides should invest heavily in such efforts.

Keywords

Cooperation - health-IT and medical engineering - public-private-partnership - standardization
 

  • References

  • 1 Ball MJ, Silva JS, Bierstock S, Douglas JV, Norcio AF, Chakraborty J. et al. Failure to provide clinicians useful IT systems: opportunities to leapfrog current technologies. Methods Inf Med 2008; 47 (01) 4-7.
    Thieme ConnectPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 2 Lindgaard G, Dudek C. What is this evasive beast we call user satisfaction?. Interacting with Computers 2003; 15: 429-52.
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 3 Pfeiffer KP. Future development of medical informatics from the viewpoint of health telematics. Methods Inf Med 2009; 48 (01) 55-61.
    Thieme ConnectPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 4 European Communities. eHealth in Action Good Practice in European Countries Good eHealth Report January 2009. Luxemburg: European Commission - Information Society and Media; 2009
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 5 Mykkanen J, Korpela M, Ripatti S, Rannanheimo J, Sorri J. Local, regional and national interoperability in hospital-level systems architecture. Methods Inf Med 2007; 46 (04) 470-5.
    Thieme ConnectPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 6 Kuhn KA, Giuse DA, Lapao L, Wurst SH. Expanding the scope of health information systems - from hospitals to regional networks, to national infrastructures, and beyond. Methods Inf Med 2007; 46 (04) 500-2.
    Thieme ConnectPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 7 Ohmann C, Kuchinke W. Future developments of medical informatics from the viewpoint of networked clinical research. Interoperability and integration. Methods Inf Med 2009; 48 (01) 45-54.
    Thieme ConnectPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 8 Gumudavelli S, McKneely PK, Thongpithoonrat P, Gurkan D, Chapman FM. Medical instrument data exchange. Conf Proc IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc 2008; 2008: 1809-12.
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 9 Rohrig R, Ruth R. [Intelligent telemedicine in intensive care units. Bed-side operation of medical technology devices and IT in intensive care medicine]. Bundesgesundheitsblatt Gesundheits-forschung Gesundheitsschutz 2009; Mar; 52 (03) 279-86.
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 10 Bott OJ, Marschollek M, Wolf KH, Haux R. Towards new scopes: sensor-enhanced regional health information systems - part 1: architectural challenges. Methods Inf Med 2007; 46 (04) 476-83.
    Thieme ConnectPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 11 Koch S, Marschollek M, Wolf KH, Plischke M, Haux R. On health-enabling and ambient-assistive technologies. What has been achieved and where do we have to go?. Methods Inf Med 2009; 48 (01) 29-37.
    Thieme ConnectPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 12 Norgall T, Blobel B, Pharow P. Personal health-the future care paradigm. Stud Health Technol Inform 2006; 121: 299-306.
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 13 Patel V, Kushniruk A. In: Bemmel Jv, Musen M. editors. Handbook of Medical Informatics. Heidelberg: Springer; 2000: 473f.
  • 14 Norman D. The Psychology Of Everyday Things. New York: Basic Books; 1988
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 15 Kushniruk AW, Borycki EM. Low-cost rapid usability engineering: designing and customizing usable healthcare information systems. Healthc Q 2006; 09 (04) 98-100 2.
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 16 Pare G, Sicotte C, Jaana M, Girouard D. Prioritizing the risk factors influencing the success of clinical information system projects. A Delphi study in Canada. Methods Inf Med 2008; 47 (03) 251-9.
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 17 Eagles S. An Introduction to IEC 80001: Aiming for Patient Safety in the Networked Healthcare Environment. http://www.aami.org/publications/ITHorizons/2008/IEC80001_Eagles.pdf Last access: 22.07.2008.
    PubMed