On Educating about Medical Data Management^[*]

Summary

Objectives: To summarize background, challenges, objectives, and methods for the usability of patient data, in particular with respect to their multiple use, and to point out how to lecture medical data management.

Methods: Analyzing the literature, providing an example based on Simpson’s paradox and summarizing research and education in the field of medical data management, respectively health information management (in German: Medizinische Dokumentation).

Results: For the multiple use of patient data, three main categories of use can be identified: patientoriented (or casuistic) analysis, patient-group reporting, and analysis for clinical studies. A so-called documentation protocol, related to study plans in clinical trials, supports the multiple use of data from the electronic health record in order to obtain valid, interpretable results. Lectures on medical data management may contain modules on introduction, basic concepts of clinical data management and coding systems, important medical coding systems (e.g. ICD, SNOMED, TNM, UMLS), typical medical documentation systems (e.g. on patient records, clinical and epidemiological registers), utilization of clinical data management systems, planning of medical coding systems and of clinical data management systems, hospital information systems and the electronic patient record, and on data management in clinical studies.

Conclusion: Usability, the ultimate goal of recording and managing patient data, requires, besides technical considerations, in addition appropriate methodology on medical data management, especially if data is intended to be used for multiple purposes, e.g. for patient care and quality management and clinical research. Medical data management should be taught in health and biomedical informatics programs.

Keywords

Patient record - health record - data analysis - medical data management - health information management - education

^* Written, extended version of an invited lecture, given on March 13, 2005, in Athens at the Special Topic Conference on ‘Health and Medical Informatics Applications – Educational Aspects’ of the European Federation of Medical Informatics (EFMI)

• References

• 1 Leiner F, Gaus W, Haux R, Knaup P. Medical data management. New York: Springer;; 2002
• 2 Berkson J. A system of codification of medical diagnoses for application to punch cards. Am J Publ Health 1936; 723-30.
• 3 Cimino JJ. Desiderata for medical vocabularies in the twenty-first century. Methods Inf Med 1998; 37: 394-403.
• 4 Côté RA, Rothwell DJ. The classification-nomenclature issues in medicine: a return to natural language. Med Inform 1989; 14: 25-41.
• 5 Dick RS, Steen EB, Detmer DE. editors. The computer- based patient record – an essential technology for health care. Institute of Medicine, National Academy Press: Washington, D.C.; revised edition; 1997
• 6 Green SB, Byar DP. Using observational data from registries to compare treatments: the fallacy of omnimetrics. Statistics Med 1984; 3: 361-70.
• 7 Klar R. Selected impressions on the beginning of the electronic medical record and patient information. Methods Inf Med 2004; 43: 537-42.
• 8 Nacke O, Wagner G. Bibliography regarding the topic: “ The role of error on medicine: quality control as a goal of medical documentation.”. Methods Inf Med 1964; 3: 132-50.
• 9 Proppe A. The physician’s task and the problem of documentation (in German). Methods Inf Med 1964; 3: 10-7.
• 10 Rector AL. Thesauri and formal classifications: terminologies for people and machines. Methods Inf Med 1998; 37: 501-9.
• 11 Rector AL, Nowlan WA, Kay S. et al. A framework for modelling the electronic medical record. Methods Inf Med 1993; 32: 109-19.
• 12 Wagner G, Immich H, Kohler CO. The in-patient record face sheet of the Heidelberg Clinics (in German). Methods Inf Med 1968; 7: 17-25.
• 13 Wagner G, Newcombe HB. Record linkage. Its methodology and application in medical data processing. Methods Inf Med 1970; 9: 121-38.
• 14 Van Bemmel JH, McCray A. editors. IMIA Yearbook of Medical Informatics 1995: The computer- based patient record. Stuttgart: Schattauer;; 1995
• 15 Bakker A, Barber B, Moehr J. Security of the distributed electronic patient record: conclusions, recommendations and guidance. Int J Med Inform 2000; 60: 227-36.
• 16 Takeda H, Matsumura Y, Kuwata S. et al. Architecture for networked electronic patient record systems. Int J Med Inform 2000; 60: 161-7.
• 17 Kuhn KA, Wurstl SHR, Bott OJ, Guise DA. Expanding the scope of health information systems.. In: Haux R, Kulikowski C. editors IMIA Yearbook of Medical Informatics 2006. Methods Inf Med 2006; 45 (Suppl. 01) S43-52.
• 18 Haux R.. Health information systems – past, present, future. Int J Med Inform 2006; 75: 268-81.
• 19 Haux R, Winter A, Ammenwerth E, Brigl B. Strategic information management in hospitals. An introduction to hospital information systems. New York: Springer;; 2004
• 20 Recommendations of the International Medical Informatics Association (IMIA) on education in health and medical Informatics. Methods Inf Med 2000; 39: 267-77.
• 21 Simpson EH. The interpretation of interaction in contingency tables. J R Stat Soc B 1951; 13: 238-41.
• 22 Byar DP. Why databases should not replace randomized clinical trials. Biometrics 1980; 36: 337-42.
• 23 Blyth CR. On Simpson’s paradox and the surething principle. JAm StatAssoc 1972; 67: 364-6.
• 24 Good IJ, Mittal Y. The amalgamation and geometry of two-by-two contingency tables. Ann Statist 1987; 15: 694-711.
• 25 Leiner F. Systematic planning of clinical documentation (in German). Ph.D. Thesis, Univ. of Heidelberg 1994
• 26 Leiner F, Haux R. Systematic planning of clinical documentation. Methods Inf Med 1996; 35: 25-34.
• 27 Knaup P, Harkener S, Ellsässer KH. et al. On the necessity of systematically planning clinical tumor documentation. Methods Inf Med 2001; 40: 90-98.
• 28 Haux R, Ammenwerth E, Häber A. et al. Medical informatics education needs information system practicums in health care settings – experiences and lessons learned from 32 practicums at four universities in two countries. Methods Inf Med 2006; 45: 294-9.
• 29 Haux R, Ammenwerth E, ter Burg WJ. et al. An international course on strategic information man- agement for medical informatics students: aim, content, structure, and experiences. Int J Med Inform 2004; 73: 97-100.
• 30 Jaspers MW, Ammenwerth E, Ter Burg WJ. et al. An international course on strategic information management for medical informatics students: international perspectives and evaluation. Int J Med Inform 2004; 73: 807-15.
• 31 Knaup P, Haux R, Häber A. et al. Teaching the fundamentals of information systems management in health care: lecture and practical training for students of medical informatics (Heidelberg/Heilbronn). Int J Med Inform 1998; 50: 195-205.
• 32 Jaspers MW, Gardner RM, Gatewood LC. et al. The International Partnership for Health Informatics Education: lessons learned from six years of experience. Methods Inf Med 2005; 44: 25-31.
• 33 Bergmann J, Bott OJ, Pretschner DP, Haux R. An e-consent-based shared EHR system architecture for integrated healthcare networks. Int J Med Inform 11.9.2006 (E-pub ahead of print).
• 34 Haux R. Knowledge-based decision support for diagnosis and therapy: on the multiple usability of patient data. Methods Inf Med 1989; 28: 69-77.
• 35 Knaup P. Cooperative documentation environments: an approach for the multiple use and distributed recording of clinical data (in German). Habilitation Thesis; UMIT: 2004
• 36 Knaup P, Garde S, Haux R. Systematic planning of patient records for cooperative care and multicenter research. Int J Med Inform; 21.9.2006 (E-pub ahead of print).
• 37 Knaup P, Garde S, Merzweiler A. et al. Towards shared patient records: an architecture for using routine data for nationwide research. Int J Med Inform 2006; 75: 191-200.
• 38 Knaup P, Pilz J, Kaltschmidt J, Ludt S, Szecsenyi J, Haefeli WE. Standardized documentation of drug recommendations in discharge letters – a contribution to quality management in cooperative care. Methods Inf Med 2006; 45: 336-42.
• 39 Knaup P, Wiedemann T, Bachert A. et al. Efficiency and safety of chemotherapy plans for children: CATIPO – a nationwide approach. Artif Intell Med 2002; 24: 229-42.
• 40 Merzweiler A, Weber R, Garde S. et al. TERMTrial – terminology-based documentation systems for cooperative clinical trials. Comp Methods Prog Biomed 2005; 78: 11-24.
• 41 Schabetsberger T, Ammenwerth E, Andreatta S. et al. From a paper-based transmission of discharge summaries to electronic communication in health care regions. Int J Med Inform 2006; 75: 209-15.
• 42 Los RK, Roukema J, van Ginneken AM. et al. Are structured data structured identically? Investigating the uniformity of pediatric patient data recorded using OpenSDE. Methods Inf Med 2005; 44: 631-8.
• 43 Thomas K, Emberton M, Reeves B. The use of a structured form during urology out-patient consultations – a randomised controlled trial. Methods Inf Med 2005; 44: 609-15.
• 44 Brender J, Ammenwerth E, Nykanen P, Talmon J. Factors influencing success and failure of health informatics systems – a pilot Delphi study. Methods Inf Med 2006; 45: 125-36.
• 45 Shabo A. A global socio-economic-medico-legal model for the sustainability of longitudinal electronic health records. Part 1. Methods Inf Med 2006; 45: 240-5.
• 46 Shabo A. A Global Socio-economic-medico-legal Model for the Sustainability of Longitudinal Electronic Health Records – Part 2. Methods Inf Med 2006; 45: 498-505.
• 47 Contiero P, Tittarelli A, Tagliabue G. et al. The EpiLink record linkage software: presentation and results of linkage test on cancer registry files. Methods Inf Med 2005; 44: 66-71.
• 48 Couris CM, Gutknecht C, Ecochard R. et al. Estimates of the number of cancer patients hospitalized in a geographic area using claims data without a unique personal identifier. Methods Inf Med 2006; 45: 515-22.
• 49 Stausberg J, Dahmen B, Drosler S. A methodological framework for the conversion of procedure classifications. Methods Inf Med 2005; 44: 57-65.
• 50 Birkmann C, Demski H, Engelbrecht R. Introducing patient cards in clinical routine: evaluation of two research projects. Methods Inf Med 2006; 45: 73-8.
• 51 Despont-Gros C, Landau R, Rutschmann O. et al. The digital pen and paper. Evaluation and acceptance of a new data acquisition device in clinical settings. Methods Inf Med 2005; 44: 359-68.
• 52 Michalowski W, Slowinski R, Wilk S. et al. Design and development of a mobile system for supporting emergency triage. Methods Inf Med 2005; 44: 14-24.
• 53 Larizza C, Bellazzi R, Stefanelli M. et al. The M2DM Project – the experience of two Italian clinical sites with clinical evaluation of a multiaccess service for the management of diabetes mellitus patients. Methods Inf Med 2006; 45: 79-84.
• 54 Machan C, Ammenwerth E, Schabetsberger T. Evaluation of the electronic transmission of medical findings from hospitals to practitioners by triangulation. Methods Inf Med 2006; 45: 225-33.
• 55 Nykanen P, Karimaa E. Success and failure factors in the regional health information system design process – results from a constructive evaluation study. Methods Inf Med 2006; 45: 85-9.
• 56 Greiner U, Mueller R, Rahm E. et al. AdaptFlow: protocol-based medical treatment using adaptive workflows. Methods Inf Med 2005; 44: 80-8.
• 57 Kuilboer MM, van Wijk MA, Mosseveld M. et al. Computed critiquing integrated into daily clinical practice affects physicians’ behavior – a randomized clinical trial with AsthmaCritic. Methods Inf Med 2006; 45: 447-54.
• 58 Garde S, Wolff AC, Kutscha U. et al. CSI-ISC – concepts for smooth integration of health care information system components into established processes of patient care. Methods Inf Med 2006; 45: 10-8.
• 59 Liaskos J, Mantas J. Measuring the user acceptance of a Web-based nursing documentation system. Methods Inf Med 2006; 45: 116-20.
• 60 Sax U, Schmidt S. Integration of genomic data in Electronic Health Records – opportunities and dilemmas. Methods Inf Med 2005; 44: 546-50.
• 61 Hollerbach A, Brandner R, Bess A. et al. Electronically signed documents in health care – analysis and assessment of data formats and transformation. Methods Inf Med 2005; 44: 520-7.
• 62 Bott OJ, Ammenwerth E, Brigl B. et al. The challenge of ubiquitous computing in health care: technology, concepts and solutions. Methods Inf Med 2005; 44: 473-9.
• 63 Estrella F, del Frate C, Hauer T. et al. Resolving clinicians’ queries across a Grid’s infrastructure. Methods Inf Med 2005; 44: 149-53.
• 64 Lindberg DA. Research opportunities and challenges in 2005. Methods Inf Med 2005; 44: 483-6.