Download PDF
Methods Inf Med 2009; 48(04): 381-390
DOI: 10.3414/ME0574
Original Articles
Schattauer GmbH

Clinical Decision Support System for Point of Care Use

Ontology-driven Design and Software Implementation
K. Farion
1   Departments of Pediatrics and Emergency Medicine, University of Ottawa, Children’s Hospital of Eastern Ontario, Ottawa, Canada
,
W. Michalowski
2   MET Research Group, Telfer School of Management, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Canada
,
S. Wilk
2   MET Research Group, Telfer School of Management, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Canada
,
D. O’Sullivan
2   MET Research Group, Telfer School of Management, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Canada
,
S. Rubin
3   Department of Surgery, University of Ottawa, Children’s Hospital of Eastern Ontario, Ottawa, Canada
,
D. Weiss
4   Institute of Computing Science, Poznan University of Technology, Poznan, Poland
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

Received: 20 May 2008

accepted: 12 January 2009

Publication Date:
17 January 2018 (online)

    Permissions and Reprints

Summary

Objectives: The objective of this research was to design a clinical decision support system (CDSS) that supports heterogeneous clinical decision problems and runs on multiple computing platforms. Meeting this objective required a novel design to create an extendable and easy to maintain clinical CDSS for point of care support. The proposed solution was evaluated in a proof of concept implementation.

Methods: Based on our earlier research with the design of a mobile CDSS for emergency triage we used ontology-driven design to represent essential components of a CDSS. Models of clinical decision problems were derived from the ontology and they were processed into executable applications during runtime. This allowed scaling applications’ functionality to the capabilities of computing platforms. A prototype of the system was implemented using the extended client-server architecture and Web services to distribute the functions of the system and to make it operational in limited connectivity conditions.

Results: The proposed design provided a common framework that facilitated development of diversified clinical applications running seamlessly on a variety of computing platforms. It was prototyped for two clinical decision problems and settings (triage of acute pain in the emergency department and postoperative management of radical pros-tatectomy on the hospital ward) and implemented on two computing platforms – desktop and handheld computers.

Conclusions: The requirement of the CDSS heterogeneity was satisfied with ontology-driven design. Processing of application models described with the help of ontological models allowed having a complex system running on multiple computing platforms with different capabilities. Finally, separation of models and runtime components contributed to improved extensibility and maintainability of the system.

Keywords

Clinical decision support systems - point of care systems - software design - ontology-driven design
 

  • References

  • 1 Michalowski W, Slowinski R, Wilk S, Farion K, Pike J, Rubin S. Design and development of a mobile system for supporting emergency triage. Methods Inf Med 2005; 44 (Suppl. 01) 14-24.
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Michalowski W, Slowinski R, Wilk S. MET system: a new approach to m-health in emergency triage. J Inf Technol Healthc 2004; 2 (Suppl. 04) 237-249.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Michalowski W, Wilk S, Farion K, Pike J, Rubin S, Slowinski R. Development of a decision algorithm to support emergency triage of scrotal pain and its implementation in the MET system. INFOR 2005; 43 (Suppl. 04) 287-301.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Farion K, Michalowski W, Rubin S, Wilk S, Correl R, Gaboury I. Prospective evaluation of the MET-AP system providing triage plans for acute pediatric abdominal pain. Int J Med Inf 2008; 77 (Suppl. 03) 208-218.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Fischer S, Stewart TE, Mehta S, Wax R, Lapinsky SE. Handheld computing in medicine. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2003; 10 (Suppl. 02) 139-149.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 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 (Suppl. 01) 4-7.
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Berner ES. editor. Clinical Decision Support Systems. Theory and Practice. 2nd ed. New York: Springer Science + Business Media; 2007
    Google Scholar
  • 8 Ammenwerth E, Buchauer A, Bludau B, Haux R. Mobile information and communication tools in the hospital. Int J Med Inf 2000; 57 (Suppl. 01) 21-40.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Bardram JE, Christensen HB. Pervasive computing support for hospitals: an overview of the activity-based computing project. IEEE Pervas Comput 2007; 6 (Suppl. 01) 44-51.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Rogers JE. Quality assurance of medical ontologies. Methods Inf Med 2006; 45 (Suppl. 03) 267-274.
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Gruber TR. A translation approach to portable ontology specifications. Knowl Acquis 1993; 5 (Suppl. 02) 199-220.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Kishore R, Zhang H, Ramesh R. A helix-spindle model for ontological engineering. Commun ACM 2004; 47 (Suppl. 02) 69-75.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 SNOMED Clinical Terms® . User Guide. July 2008 International Release: The International Health Terminology Standards Development Organisation. 2008
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Rogers JE, Roberts A, Solomon D, van der Haring E, Wroe CJ, Zanstra PE. et al. GALEN ten years on: tasks and supporting tools. In: Patel V, Rogers R, Haux R. editors. Medinfo 2001: Proceedings of the 10th World Congress on Medical Informatics. Amsterdam: IOS Press; 2001. pp 256-260.
    Google Scholar
  • 15 Noy NF, Rubin DL, Musen MA. Making biomedical ontologies and ontology repositories work. IEEE Intell Syst 2004; 19 (Suppl. 06) 78-81.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Tu S, Eriksson H, Gennari JH, Shahar Y, Musen MA. Ontology-based configuration of problem-solving methods and generation of knowledge-acquisition tools: application of PROTÉGÉ-II to protocol-based decision support. Artif Intell Med 1995; 7 (Suppl. 03) 257-289.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Crubézy M, Musen MA. Ontologies in support of problem solving. In: Staab S, Studer R. editors. Handbook on Ontologies. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag; 2004. pp 321-342.
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Wright A, Sittig DF. A four-phase model of the evolution of clinical decision support architectures. Int J Med Inf 2008; 77 (10) 641-649.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 de Dombal FT, Leaper DJ, Staniland JR, McCann AP, Horrocks JC. Computer-aided diagnosis of acute abdominal pain. Br Med J 1972; 2 5804 9-13.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Gardner RM, Pryor TA, Warner HR. The HELP hospital information system: update 1998. Int J Med Inf 1999; 54 (Suppl. 03) 169-182.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Kawamoto K, Lobach DF. Design, implementation, use and preliminary evaluation of SEBASTIAN, a standards-based Web service for clinical decision support. In: Proceedings of the AMIA 2005 Annual Symposium 2005. pp 380-384.
    Google Scholar
  • 22 Musen MA, Schreiber AT. Architectures for intelligent systems based on reusable components. Artif Intell Med 1995; 7 (Suppl. 03) 189-199.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Musen MA. Scalable software architectures for decision support. Methods Inf Med 1999; 38 4–5 229-238.
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Musen MA. Domain ontologies in software engineering: Use of Protégé with the EON architecture. Methods Inf Med 1998; 37 4–5 540-550.
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Martins SB, Lai S, Tu S, Shankar R, Hastings SN, Hoffman BB. et al. Offline testing of the ATHENA Hypertension decision support system knowledge base to improve the accuracy of recommendations. In: Proceedings of the AMIA 2006 Annual Symposium 2006. pp 539-543.
    Google Scholar
  • 26 Crubézy M, O’Connor M, Buckeridge DL, Pincus Z, Musen MA. Ontology-centered syndromic surveil-lance for bioterrorism. IEEE Intell Syst 2005; 20 (Suppl. 05) 26-35.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Joutchkov A, Tverdokhlebov N, Yanovsky A, Golitsin S, Arnautov S, Strizh I. Libraries of strategies and ontology-driven subject area models as “corner stones” in Grid development. Methods Inf Med 2005; 44 (Suppl. 02) 249-252.
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Cannataro M, Cuda G, Veltri P. Modeling and designing a proteomics application on PROTEUS. Methods Inf Med 2005; 44 (Suppl. 02) 221-226.
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Eriksson H, Puerta AR, Musen MA. Generation of knowledge-acquisition tools from domain ontologies. Int J Hum Comput Stud 1994; 41 (Suppl. 03) 425-453.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 30 Nadkarni PM, Marenco L, Chen R, Skoufos E, Shepherd G, Miller P. Organization of heterogeneous scientific data using the EAV/CR representation. J Am Med Inform Assoc 1999; 6 (Suppl. 06) 478-493.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 31 Jing J, Helal AS, Elmagarmid A. Client-server computing in mobile environments. ACM Comput Surv 1999; 31 (Suppl. 02) 117-157.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 32 Gennari JH, Musen MA, Fergerson RW, Grosso WE, Crubézy M, Eriksson H. et al. The evolution of Protégé: an environment for knowledge-based systems development. Int J Hum Comput Stud 2003; 58 (Suppl. 01) 89-123.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 33 OWL Web Ontology Language Guide.. W3C; cited August 29, 2008. Available from: www.w3.org/TR/owl-guide.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 34 Simple Object Access Protocol.. W3C; cited August 29, 2008. Available from: www.w3.org/TR/soap/.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 35 Michalowski W, Wilk S, Thijssen A, Li M. Using a Bayesian belief network model to categorize length of stay for radical prostatectomy patients. Health Care Manag Sci 2006; 9 (Suppl. 04) 341-348.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 36 Hanson 3rd CW, Marshall BE. Artificial intelligence applications in the intensive care unit. Crit Care Med 2001; 29 (Suppl. 02) 427-435.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 37 Blaszczynski J, Farion K, Michalowski W, Wilk S, Rubin S, Weiss D. Mining clinical data: selecting decision support algorithm for the MET-AP system. In: Miksch S, Hunter J, Keravnou ET. editors. Artificial Intelligence in Medicine. 10th Conference on Artificial Intelligence in Medicine, AIME 2005, Aberdeen, UK, July 23-27, 2005, Proceedings. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag; 2005. pp 429-433.
    Google Scholar
  • 38 Wilk S, Slowinski R, Michalowski W, Greco S. Supporting triage of children with abdominal pain in the emergency room. Eur J Oper Res 2005; 160 (Suppl. 03) 696-709.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 39 Wilk S, Michalowski W, Farion K, Kersten M. Interaction design for mobile clinical decision support systems: the MET system solutions. Found Comput Decis Sci 2007; 32 (Suppl. 01) 47-61.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 40 Michalowski W, Kersten M, Wilk S, Slowinski R. Designing man-machine interactions for mobile clinical systems: MET triage support using Palm hand-helds. Eur J Oper Res 2007; 177 (Suppl. 03) 1409-1417.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 41 Carter JH. Design and implementation issues. In: Berner ES. editor. Clinical Decision Support Systems. Theory and Practice. 2nd ed. New York: Springer Science + Business Media; 2007. pp 64-98.
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 42 Sadeghi S, Barzi A, Sadeghi N, King B. A Bayesian model for triage decision support. Int J Med Inf 2006; 75 (Suppl. 05) 403-411.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 43 Samore MH, Bateman K, Alder SC, Hannah E, Donnelly S, Stoddard GJ. et al. Clinical decision support and appropriateness of antimicrobial prescribing: a randomized trial. JAMA 2005; 294 (18) 2305-2314.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 44 Berner ES, Houston TK, Ray MN, Allison JJ, Heudebert GR, Chatham WW. et al. Improving ambulatory prescribing safety with a handheld decision support system: a randomized controlled trial. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2006; 13 (Suppl. 02) 171-179.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 45 Eisenstein J, Vanderdonckt J, Puerta AR. Applying model-based techniques to the development of UIs for mobile computers. In: IUI 2001: Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces, Santa Fe, New Mexico, USA, January 14-17, 2001. New York: ACM; 2001. pp 69-76.
    Google Scholar
  • 46 Hine MJ, Farion K, Michalowski W, Wilk S. Decision making by emergency room physicians and residents: implications for the design of clinical decision support systems. Int J Healthc Inf Syst Inform 2008; 4 (Suppl. 02) 17-35.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar