Positioning the Patient: Normative Analysis of Electronic Patient Records

I. van der Ploeg

doi:10.1055/s-0038-1634352

Methods of Information in Medicine, Table of Contents

Methods Inf Med 2003; 42(04): 477-481
DOI: 10.1055/s-0038-1634352

Original article

Schattauer GmbH

Positioning the Patient: Normative Analysis of Electronic Patient Records

Authors

I. van der Ploeg

¹Institute of Health Care Policy and Management, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands

Abstract

Summary

Objective: This paper aims to take the current ethical research on electronic patient records beyond the ethical-legal issues of privacy to include contemporary issues of the ‘politics of technology’ and ‘value sensitive design’.

Methods: The paper employs an interpretive approach to analyze research on electronic patient records with concepts of the politics of technology and value sensitive design.

Results and Conclusions: The broad development towards computerization of patient records lacks needed attention to the potential effects of such systems on the patients. This paper argues for a broader understanding of the normative aspects involved in the design and implementation of electronic patient records (EPRs). It suggests three supplemental dimensions for normative analysis of EPR design relevant to the position of the patient: presence, agency, and identity. These dimension are discussed and illustrated as concepts connecting ethical dimensions of patienthood with design features of EPRs.

Keywords

Electronic patient record - ethics - normative analysis - value sensitive design - patient centered approach

Full Text

References

References
1 Dennis JC. Privacy and confidentiality of health information. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass; 2000
2 Kluge EH. Health information, privacy, confidentiality and ethics. Int J Biomed Comput 1994; 35 Suppl: 23-7 MG T 1432: 1977-84.
3 Papagounos GBS. The multifarious function of medical records, ethical issues. Methods Inf Med 1999; 38: 317-20.
4 Wagner I. Ethical issues of healthcare in the information society. Opinion of the European Group on Ethics in Science and New Technologies to the European Commission, July 1999
5 Sadan B. Patient data confidentiality and Patient Rights. Int J Med Inf 2001; 62: 41-9.
6 Flatley-Brennan P, Kuang YS, Volrathongchai K. Patient-centered information systems. Year-book Medical Informatics 2000; pp. 79-86.
7 Bannon LJ. Dwelling in the ‘Great Divide’:The Case of HCI and CSCW. In: Sauer C, Yetton P. editors. Steps to the future, fresh thinking on the management of IT-based organizational transformation. San Fransisco: The Jossey-Bass; 1997. pp. 355-377.
8 Schmidt K, Simone C. Coordination mechanism: towards a conceptual foundation of CSCW systems design. Computer Supported Cooperative Work 1996; 5: 155-200.
9 Teege G. Users as composers: parts and features as a basis for tailorability in CSCW systems. CSCW 2000; 9.
10 Sjöberg C, Timpka P. Participatory design of information systems in health care. J Am Med Inf Ass 1998; 5: 177-83.
11 Timpka T, Sjöberg C, Hallberg N, Eriksson H, Lindblom P, Hedblom P, Svensson B, Marmolin H. Participatory design of computer-supported organizational learning in health care: methods and experiences. Proc Annu Symp Comput Appl Med Care 1995; 800-4.
12 Kling R, Star SL. Human centered systems in the perspective of organizational and social informatics. Computers and Society 1998; 28: 22-9.
13 Friedman B. editor. Human values and the design of computer technology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1997
14 Berg M. Rationalizing medical work, decision support techniques and medical practices. Cambridge (MA): MIT Press; 1997
15 Staccini P, Joubert M, Fieschi D, Fieschi M. Confidentiality issues within a clinical information system, moving from data-driven to event-driven design. Methods Inf Med 1999; 38: 298-302.
16 Anderson JG. Security of the distributed electronic patient record, a case-based approach to identifying policy issues. Int J Med Inf 2000; 60: 111-8.
17 Turn R, Ware WH. Privacy and security issues in information systems. Santa Monica (CA): Rand; 1976
18 Panel on Confidentiality and Data Access. Private lives and public policy. Confidentiality and accessibility of government Statistics. Washington DC.: National Academy Press; 1993
19 Kluge E-HW. Medical narratives and patient analogs, the ethical implications of electronic patient records. Methods Inf Med 1999; 38: 253-9.
20 Berg M. Lessons from a dinosaur: Mediating IS research through analysis of the medical record. In: IFIP W,G. 8.2. Working Conference 2000 Aalborg: 2000
21 Freeman R. Medical records and public policy, the discursive reconstruction of the patient in Europe. In: ECPR Joint Sessions of Workshops, Workshop 9. Policy, Discourse and Institutional Reform; Grenoble: 2001
22 Lovis C, Baud RH, Planche P. Power of expression in the electronic patient record, structured data or narrative text?. Int J Med Inf 2000; 60: 58-9.