Emergency Medicine Informatics: Information Management and Applications In the 21st Century (original) (raw)

Abstract

Prehospital care is often defined as the connection between public safety, healthcare and public REVIEW ARTICLE Emergency Medicine Informatics (EMI) is the collection, management, processing, and application of emergency patient care and operational data. EMI is transforming and improving our prehospital care systems and emergency department (ED) operations, is critical for public health surveillance, and will enable us to expand clinical research in our institutions, regions, and nations. EMI is one of our most important tools for improving emergency care and positively impacting the health of the public. For prehospital care, EMI systems provide information to analyze the cost-effectiveness of clinical interventions, to organize EMS operations, to coordinate communication for service requests, to monitor quality control and educational needs, and to track patient outcomes. The practice of emergency medicine in the ED requires the capture of many data and time elements so that ED care is efficient. EMI modules support triage acuity and tracking, patient tracking, nurse and physician charting, clinical decision support, order entry, and discharge instructions and prescription generation. There must be coordination of the EMI with hospital, laboratory, and radiology reporting systems, and access to hospital and ambulatory clinic records. Clinical information should be aggregated into an ED Database which can then be used for clinical investigation. The cooperation and support of the hospital information services department, hospital administration, emergency medicine physicians, and emergency medicine researchers, is necessary so that the ED database will be well constructed, and most importantly, well used to improve patient care. Because the information from aggregated ED databases provides population-based information about acute illness and injury, ED databases are now one of the key elements of public health surveillance. An effective syndromic surveillance system based upon ED Chief Complaint (CC), nursing triage note, and ICD-9 or-10 CM codes requires the cooperation of hospital information systems professionals, hospital administrators, ED directors, and public health professionals. [Emergencias 2009;21:354-361]

Loading...

Loading Preview

Sorry, preview is currently unavailable. You can download the paper by clicking the button above.

References (40)

  1. Mears G. Emergency medical services information systems. N C Med J. 2007;68:266-7.
  2. Lerner EB, Nichol G, Spaite DW, Garrison HG, Maio RF. A compre- hensive framework for determining the cost of an emergency medi- cal services system. Ann Emerg Med. 2007;49:304-13.
  3. Herrington R, Gordon B. Administration, Management and Opera- tions, in Principles of EMS Systems 3rd ed, Chapter 7. Am Coll Eme Physicians 2006;7:74-87.
  4. Myers JB, Slovis CM, Eckstein M, Goodloe JM, Isaacs SM, Loflin JR, et al. U.S. Metropolitan Municipalities' EMS Medical Directors. Eviden- ce-based performance measures for emergency medical services systems: a model for expanded EMS benchmarking. Prehosp Emerg Care. 2008;12:141-51.
  5. Sayre MR, White LJ, Brown LH, McHenry SD. National EMS Research Agenda. Prehosp Emerg Care. 2002;6(Supl. 3):S1-S43.
  6. Sprivulis P, Da Silva JA, Jacobs I, Jelinek G, Swift R. ECHO: the Wes- tern Australian Emergency Care Hospitalisation and Outcome linked data project. Aust N Z J Public Health. 2006;30:123-7.
  7. Dawson SUH.National Emergency Medical Services Information System (NEMSIS). Prehosp Emerg Care. 2006;10:314-6.
  8. AHRQ. Research Finds Low Electronic Health Record Adoption Rates for Physician Groups. Press Release. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, Rockville, MD. (Consultado 14 Septiembre 2005). Dis- ponible en: http://www.ahrq.gov/news/press/pr2005/lowehrpr.htm.
  9. 9 DesRoches CM, Campbell EG, Rao SR, Donelan K, Ferris TG, Jha A, et al. Electronic health records in ambulatory care-a national survey of physicians. N Engl J Med. 2008;359:50-60.
  10. Lawrence D. Next generation EDIS. The classic "best of breed vs. en- terprise" discussion is alive and well among EDIS buyers. Healthc In- form. 2007;24:12-6.
  11. Feied CF, Smith MS, Handler JA. Keynote address: medical informa- tics and emergency medicine. Acad Emerg Med. 2004;11:1118-26.
  12. Feied CF, Handler JA, Smith MS, Gillam M, Kanhouwa M, Rothen- haus T, et al. Clinical information systems: instant ubiquitous clinical data for error reduction and improved clinical outcomes. Acad Emerg Med. 2004;11:1162-9.
  13. Handler JA, Adams JG, Feied CF, Gillam M, Vozenilek J, Barthell EN, et al. Developing consensus in emergency medicine information technology. Acad Emerg Med. 2004;11:1109-11.
  14. Davidson SJ, Zwemer FL Jr, Nathanson LA, Sable KN, Khan AN. Whe- re's the beef? The promise and the reality of clinical documentation. Acad Emerg Med. 2004;11:1127-34.
  15. Berman J. Report: Nurses Reject Table PCs, Citing Many Deficien- cies, Health IT World, 2004 Jun 15. (Consultado 21 Septiembre 2005). Disponible en: http://www.health-itworld.com/enews/06-15- 2004_236.html.
  16. Poissant L, Pereira J, Tamblyn R, Kawasumi Y. The impact of electro- nic health records on time efficiency of physicians and nurses: a systematic review. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2005;12:505-16.
  17. Nawar E, Niska RW, Xu J. National Hospital Ambulatory Medical Ca- re Survey: 2005 Emergency Department Summary. Advance Data from Vital and Health Statistics, US Department of Health and Hu- man Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Health Statistics 2007;386:29.
  18. Bradley EH, Herrin J, Eibel B, McNamara RL, Magid DJ, Nallamoth BK, et al. Hospital Quality for Acute Myocardial Infarction: Correla- tion among Process Measures and Relationships with Short Term Mortality. JAMA. 20065;296:72-8.
  19. Garrison HG, Runyon CW, Tintinalli JE, et al. Emergency Department Surveillance: An Examination of Issues and a Proposal for a National Strategy. Ann Emerg Med. 1994;24:849-56.
  20. Data Elements for Emergency Department Systems, release 1.0, Cen- ters for Disease Control and Prevention, US Department of Health and Human Services, 1997.
  21. Haas S, Travers D, Tintinalli J, Pollock D, Walter A,Barthell E, et al. Towards Vocabulary Control for Chief Complaint. Acad Emerg Med. 2008;5:476-82.
  22. Pitts SR, Niska RW, National Hospital Ambulatory Medical Care Sur- vey: 2006 Emergency Department Summary, National Health Statis- tics Reports. 2008;7:6.
  23. Travers DA, Waller A, Haas S, Lober WB, Beard C. Emergency department data for bioterrorism surveillance: Electronic availability, timeliness, sour- ces and standards. Proceedings of the AMIA Symposium. 2003;664-8.
  24. Travers DA, Barnett C, Ising A, Waller A. Timeliness of emergency department diagnoses for syndromic surveillance. Proceedings of the AMIA Symposium 2006;769-73.
  25. Henning KJ. Overview of syndromic surveillance: what is syndro- Emergencias 2009; 21: 354-361
  26. mic surveillance? Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, vol. 53 (Supplement). Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. 2004;5-11.
  27. Sosin DM. Syndromic surveillance: the case for skillful investment. Biosecur Bioterro. 2003;1:247-53.
  28. Chapman-WW and Dowling-JN. Consultative Meeting on Chief Complaint Classifiers and Standardized Syndromic Definitions. Dis Surveillance. 2007;4:47.
  29. Travers DA, Haas SW. Using nurses natural language entries to build a concept-oriented terminology for patients' chief complaints in the emergency department. J Biomed Inform. 2003;36:260-70.
  30. Forbach C, Scholer MJ, Falls D, Ising A, Waller A. Improving system ability to identify symptom complexes in free-text data. Adv Dis Sur- veillance. 2007;2:7.
  31. Heffernan R, Mostashari F, Das D, Besculides M, Rodriguez C, Green- ko J, et al. New York City syndromic surveillance systems. MMWR. 2004;24 Supl:23-7.
  32. Travers D, Wu S, Scholer MJ, Westlake M, Waller AE, McCalla A, Eva- luation of a Chief Complaint Pre-Processor for Biosurveillance, AMIA 2007 Symposium Proceedings, pp 736-740.
  33. Dara J, Dowling JN, Travers D, Cooper GF, Chapman WW. Chief complaint preprocessing evaluated on statistical and non-statistical classifiers. Adv Dis Surveillance. 2007;2:4.
  34. Komatsu K, Trujillo L, Lu HM, Zeng D, Chen H. Ontology-based au- tomatic chief complaints classification for syndromic surveillance. Adv Dis Surveillance. 2007;2:17.
  35. Page ES. Continuous inspection schemes. Biometrika. 1954;41:100-15.
  36. Hutwagner L, Thompson W, Seeman GM, Treadwell T. bioterro- rism preparedness and response Early Aberration Reporting System (EARS). J Urban Health. 2003;80(Supl 1):i89-96.
  37. Chretien JP, Burkom HS, Sedyaningsih ER, Larasati RP, Lescano AG, Mundaca MPC, et al. Syndromic surveillance: adapting innovations to developing settings. PLoS Med. 200825;5:e72.
  38. Chu A, Blythe D, Tolson K, Collier D, Minson M. Identifying a Me- ningitis Case through Syndromic Surveillance: An Example of Detec- ting Events of Public Health Importance and Improving Situational Awareness. Adv Dis Surveillance. 2007;2:98.
  39. Schlegelmilch J, Gunn J, Pendarvis J, Donovan M, Vinje J, Widdow- son MA, et al. Bio-Surveillance and Enhanced Situational Awareness. Adv Dis Surveillance. 2007;4:191.
  40. Barnett C, Deyneka L, Waller A. Post-Katrina Situational Awareness in North Carolina. Adv Dis Surveillance. 2007;2:142.