Search PubMedSearch

Biomedical subjects

A van't Hooft

Publications and source records attributed to A van't Hooft.

2 recordsLinked to original sources

Coordinating shared care using electronic data interchange.

Shared care is the situation in which physicians jointly treat the same patient. Shared care may occur with elderly patients suffering from several health problems, patients with chronic disorders such as diabetes, mellitus, obstructive pulmonary diseases, or cardiological disorders. For a number of health problems, including diabetes, shared care protocols have been developed involving division of tasks between health care providers from different disciplines [1]. Optimal communication is considered to be a vital aspect of shared care, both from medical and cost-effectiveness points of view, but at the same time communication forms the bottleneck as physicians often lack time to comply with the protocol [2]. At present, new technologies are emerging that hold the promise of improving communication between health care providers. One such technology is Electronic Data Interchange (EDI), defined as "the replacement of paper documents by standard electronic messages conveyed from one computer to another without manual intervention" [3]. In Europe, the ISO syntax standard EDIFACT has been adopted as the standard for defining EDI-messages [4]. In The Netherlands, coordination of the standardization of health care messages is performed by a national organization. At present, several standardized messages are available for a variety of purposes. One is a message for data exchange between physicians; in this message, however, only physician-patient- and hospital-identifying data are structured, and all medical data is transferred as free text. Consequently, using this message, the receiving system is unable to integrate the data into the computer-based patient record. In order to support shared care, a message is needed that can also transfer the structure of the data in a computer-based record in order to allow integration of records from multiple sources. Therefore, we developed a new message, called MEDEUR, that is designed for integrated patient data exchange between computer-based patient records. The message can contain both administrative and medical data and can be used for transmission of a complete medical record, or sections of it. Our departments are working on a project in which general practitioners and specialists use their own electronic medical record system for storing data of jointly treated patients. In addition, the participating physicians use the MEDEUR message standard in communicating about these patients. The use of EDI enables physicians to transmit patient data electronically to another physician's computer system. The receiving physician can store the data automatically in his electronic medical record without having to re-type the data. We will demonstrate the electronic data interchange functionality of the general practitioner's information system, ELIAS, and the integrated composing and storing of electronic messages. We will also discuss several system design issues.

Computer Communication Networks

Shared care for diabetes: supporting communication between primary and secondary care.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the effects on information exchange of electronic communication between physicians co-treating diabetic patients. DESIGN: Comparison of traditional paper-based communication for reporting and electronic communication. SETTING: General practitioners and an internal medicine outpatient clinic of an urban public hospital. SUBJECTS: A total of 275 diabetic patients, and the 32 general practitioners and one internal medicine consultant who cared for them. INTERVENTION: An electronic communication network, linking up the computer-based patient records of the physicians, thus enabling electronic data interchange. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Number of letters sent and received per year by the general practitioners, the number of diabetes-related parameters (e.g. results of laboratory tests) in the patient records, and HBA1C levels. RESULTS: INTERVENTION GPs received more messages per year (1.6 per patient) than control GPs (0.5 per patient, P<0.05). Significant higher availability (P<0.05) was achieved for data on HBA1C levels, fructosamine levels, blood pressure measurements, cholesterol levels, triglyceride levels and weight measurements. INTERVENTION patients showed a slight but significant decrease of HBA1C levels in the second semester of 1994 (from 7.0 to 6.8, P = 0.03), control patients also showed a slightly decreased group mean, but this change was not significant (from 6.6 to 6.5, P = 0.52). The magnitudes of these mean differences, however, were not significantly different (intervention group: 0.21; control group: 0.12, P = 0.68). CONCLUSIONS: The electronic communication network for exchanging consultation outcomes significantly increased frequency of communication and the availability of data to the general practitioner on diagnostic procedures performed in the hospital, thus providing more complete information about the care that patients are receiving. A large-scale experiment over a longer period of time is needed to assess the effects of improved communication on quality of care.

Adult