PDF herunterladen
Appl Clin Inform 2019; 10(05): 935-943
DOI: 10.1055/s-0039-3400749
Case Report
Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York

Modeling a Clinical Pathway for Contraception

Letha J. Sooter
1   Department of Informatics and Networked Systems, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, United States
,
Steve Hasley
2   American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, Washington, District of Columbia, United States
,
Robert Lario
3   Veterans Health Administration and University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah, United States
,
Kenneth S. Rubin
3   Veterans Health Administration and University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah, United States
,
Faruk Hasić
4   Research Centre for Information Systems Engineering, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
› Institutsangaben
Weitere Informationen

Publikationsverlauf

16. Juli 2019

21. Oktober 2019

Publikationsdatum:
11. Dezember 2019 (online)

Auch verfügbar auf
   Lizenzen und Reprints

Abstract

Background The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) produced a 72-page document titled “U.S. Selective Practice Recommendations for Contraceptive Use” in 2016. This document contains the medical eligibility criteria (MEC) for contraceptive initiation or continuation based on a patient's current health status. Notations such as Business Process Model and Notation (BPMN) and Decision Model and Notation (DMN) might be useful to model such recommendations.

Objective Our objective was to use BPMN and DMN to model and standardize the processes and decisions involved in initiating birth control according to the CDC's MEC for birth control initiation. This model could then be incorporated into an electronic health records system or other digital platform.

Methods Medical terminology, processes, and decisions were modeled in coordination with the CDC to ensure correctness. Challenges in terminology bindings were identified and categorized.

Results A model was successfully produced. Integration of clearly defined data elements proved to be the biggest challenge.

Conclusion BPMN and DMN have strengths and weaknesses when modeling medical processes; however, they can be used to successfully create models for clinical pathways.

Keywords

business process model and notation - decision model and notation - contraception - medical eligibility criteria - clinical pathway - clinical guideline

Protection of Human and Animal Subjects

No human or animal subjects were included in this project.


 

  • References

  • 1 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. U.S. Medical Eligibility Criteria for Contraceptive Use, 2016. Available at: https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/65/rr/pdfs/rr6503.pdf . Accessed August 20, 2019
    PubMed
  • 2 OMG. Business Process Model and Notation (BPMN) Version 2.0.2, 2014. Available at: https://www.omg.org/spec/BPMN/2.0.2 . Accessed October 5, 2019
    PubMed
  • 3 OMG. Decision Model and Notation (DMN) Version 1.2, 2019. Available at: https://www.omg.org/spec/DMN . Accessed October 5, 2019
    PubMed
  • 4 Ferrante S, Bonacina S, Pozzi G, Pinciroli F, Marceglia S. A design methodology for medical processes. Appl Clin Inform 2016; 7 (01) 191-210
    Thieme ConnectPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 5 Dong W, Huang Z. A method to evaluate critical factors for successful implementation of clinical pathways. Appl Clin Inform 2015; 6 (04) 650-668
    Thieme ConnectPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 6 Pope C. Resisting evidence: the study of evidence-based medicine as a contemporary social movement. Health 2003; 7 (03) 267-282
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 7 Kohn LT, Corrigan J, Donaldson MS. To Err Is Human: Building a Safer Health System. Washington, DC: National Academy Press; 2000
    Suche in Google Scholar
  • 8 Brook RH, McGlynn EA, Shekelle PG. Defining and measuring quality of care: a perspective from US researchers. Int J Qual Health Care 2000; 12 (04) 281-295
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 9 Reid RO, Friedberg MW, Adams JL, McGlynn EA, Mehrotra A. Associations between physician characteristics and quality of care. Arch Intern Med 2010; 170 (16) 1442-1449
    PubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 10 Schuster MA, McGlynn EA, Brook RH. How good is the quality of health care in the United States?. Milbank Q 1998; 76 (04) 517-563 , 509
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 11 McGlynn EA, Asch SM, Adams J. , et al. The quality of health care delivered to adults in the United States. N Engl J Med 2003; 348 (26) 2635-2645
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 12 Howe JL, Adams KT, Hettinger AZ, Ratwani RM. Electronic health record usability issues and potential contribution to patient harm. JAMA 2018; 319 (12) 1276-1278
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 13 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. US Medical Eligibility Criteria (US MEC) for Contraceptive Use, 2016 Summary. Available at: https://www.cdc.gov/reproductivehealth/contraception/mmwr/mec/summary.html . Accessed August 20, 2019
    PubMed
  • 14 Trisotech. Cloud-based software to Visualize, Innovate, Transform, and Improve your organization, 2019. Available at: https://www.trisotech.com/ . Accessed October 5, 2019
    PubMed
  • 15 Scheuerlein H, Rauchfuss F, Dittmar Y. , et al. New methods for clinical pathways-business process modeling notation (BPMN) and tangible business process modeling (t.BPM). Langenbecks Arch Surg 2012; 397 (05) 755-761
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 16 Strasser M, Pfeifer F, Helm E, Schuler A, Altmann J. Defining and reconstructing clinical processes based on IHE and BPMN 2.0. Stud Health Technol Inform 2011; 169: 482-486
    PubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 17 Hasić F, De Smedt J, Vanthienen J. Augmenting processes with decision intelligence: principles for integrated modelling. Decis Support Syst 2018; 107: 1-2
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 18 Hasić F, Devadder L, Dochez M, Hanot J, De Smedt J, Vanthienen J. Challenges in refactoring processes to include decision modelling. In: International Conference on Business Process Management. Springer; 2017: 529-541
    PubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 19 Hasić F, De Smedt J, Vanthienen J. A service-oriented architecture design of decision-aware information systems: decision as a service. In: OTM Confederated International Conferences “On the Move to Meaningful Internet Systems.” Springer; 2017: 353-361
    PubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 20 Hasić F, Vanwijck L, Vanthienen J. Integrating Processes, Cases, and Decisions for Knowledge-Intensive Process Modelling. In: International Workshop on Practicing Open Enterprise Modeling; 2017: 1-12
    PubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 21 Hasić F, De Smedt J, Vanthienen J. An illustration of five principles for integrated process and decision modelling (5PDM). KU Leuven; 2017: 1-8 . Available at: SSRN 3082752. Accessed October 30, 2019
    Suche in Google Scholar
  • 22 Combi C, Oliboni B, Zardiniy A, Zerbato F. Seamless design of decision-intensive care pathways. In: IEEE International Conference on Healthcare Informatics (ICHI). IEEE 2016: 35-45
    PubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 23 Combi C, Oliboni B, Zardini A, Zerbato F. A methodological framework for the integrated design of decision-intensive care pathways—an application to the management of COPD patients. J Healthcare Inform Res 2017; 1 (02) 157-217
    PubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 24 Antonacci G, Calabrese A, D'Ambrogio A, Giglio A, Intrigila B, Ghiron NL. A BPMN-based automated approach for the analysis of healthcare processes. In: 2016 IEEE 25th International Conference on Enabling Technologies: Infrastructure for Collaborative Enterprises (WETICE). IEEE 2016: 124-129
    PubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 25 HL7 FHIR. Welcome to FHIR, 2019. Available at: http://hl7.org/fhir/ . Accessed October 5, 2019
    PubMed
  • 26 Loya SR, Kawamoto K, Chatwin C, Huser V. Service oriented architecture for clinical decision support: a systematic review and future directions. J Med Syst 2014; 38 (12) 140
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 27 Object Management Group. Field Guide to Shareable Clinical Pathways. BPMN, CMMN & DMN in Healthcare. Version: 1.0. OMG Healthcare Domain Taskforce; 2018
    Suche in Google Scholar
  • 28 The Simple Healthcare Terminology Solution. Solor. Available at: http://solor.io/ . Accessed July 10, 2019
    PubMed
  • 29 Giacomo GD, Oriol X, Estañol M, Teniente E. Linking data and BPMN processes to achieve executable models. Advanced Information Systems Engineering Lecture Notes in Computer Science. 2017: 612-628 . Doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-59536-8_38
    PubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 30 Combi C, Oliboni B, Weske M, Zerbato F. Conceptual modeling of processes and data: connecting different perspectives. Conceptual Modeling Lecture Notes in Computer Science. 2018: 236-250 . Doi: 10.1007/978-3-030-00847-5_18
    PubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 31 Bazhenova E, Zerbato F, Oliboni B, Weske M. From BPMN process models to DMN decision models. Inf Syst 2019; 83: 69-88
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 32 Hewelt M, Kunde A, Weske M, Meinel C. Recommendations for medical treatment processes: the PIGS approach. Business Process Management Workshops Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing. 2015: 16-27 . Doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-15895-2_2
    PubMedSuche in Google Scholar