Platform for Efficient Switching between Multiple Devices in the Intensive Care Unit

 

 Buy Article Permissions and Reprints

Summary

Introduction: This article is part of the Focus Theme of Methods of Information in Medicine on “Managing Interoperability and Complexity in Health Systems”.

Objectives: Handheld computers, such as tablets and smartphones, are becoming more and more accessible in the clinical care setting and in Intensive Care Units (ICUs). By making the most useful and appropriate data available on multiple devices and facilitate the switching between those devices, staff members can efficiently integrate them in their workflow, allowing for faster and more accurate decisions. This paper addresses the design of a platform for the efficient switching between multiple devices in the ICU. The key functionalities of the platform are the integration of the platform into the workflow of the medical staff and providing tailored and dynamic information at the point of care.

Methods: The platform is designed based on a 3-tier architecture with a focus on extensibility, scalability and an optimal user experience. After identification to a device using Near Field Communication (NFC), the appropriate medical information will be shown on the selected device. The visualization of the data is adapted to the type of the device. A web-centric approach was used to enable extensibility and portability.

Results: A prototype of the platform was thoroughly evaluated. The scalability, performance and user experience were evaluated. Performance tests show that the response time of the system scales linearly with the amount of data. Measurements with up to 20 devices have shown no performance loss due to the concurrent use of multiple devices.

Conclusions: The platform provides a scalable and responsive solution to enable the efficient switching between multiple devices. Due to the web-centric approach new devices can easily be integrated. The performance and scalability of the platform have been evaluated and it was shown that the response time and scalability of the platform was within an acceptable range.

• References

• 1 Lapinsky S. Mobile computing in critical care. Journal of Critical Care 2007; 22 (01) 41-44.
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 2 Berger E. The iPad: Gadget or medical godsend?. Annals of Emergency Medicine 2010; 56 (01) A21-A22.
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 3 Kubben P. Neurosurgical apps for iPhone, iPod touch, iPad and Android. Surgical Neurology International 2010; 1 (01) 89 +.
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 4 Lapinsky P, Weshler J, Mehta S, Varkul M, Hallett D, Stewart T. Handheld computers in Critical Care. Journal of Critical Care 2001; 5: 227+.
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 5 Colpaert K, Vanbelleghem S, Danneels C, Benoit D, Steurbaut K, Van Hoecke S. et al. Has information technology finally been adopted in Flemish Intensive Care Units?. BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making 2010; 10: 62.
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 6 Osheroff J, Teich J, Middleton B, Steen E, Wright A, Detmer D. A roadmap for National Action on Clinical Decision Support. JAMIA 2007; 14 (02) 141-145.
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 7 Garg A, Adhikari N, McDonald H, Rosas-Arellano P, Devereaux P, Beyene J. et al. Effects of Computerized Clinical Decision Support Systems on Practitioner Performance and Patient Outcomes. JAMA 2005; 293 (10) 1223-1238.
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 8 Moxey A, Robertson J, Newby D, Hains I, Williamson M, Pearson S. Computerized Clinical Decision Support for Prescribing: Provision does not guarantee Uptake. JAMIA 2010; 17 (01) 25-33.
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 9 Orwat C, Graefe A, Faulwasser T. Towards Pervasive Computing in Health Care - A Literature Review. Social Science Research Network Working Paper Series 2008; 8: 26.
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 10 Kawamoto K, Lobach D. Clinical Decision Support provided within Physician Order Entry Systems: A Systematic Review of Features Effective for changing Clinician Behavior. In. AMIA Annl Sym Proc. 2003: 361-365.
  Google Scholar
• 11 Decruyenaere J, DeTurck F, Vanhastel S, Vandermeulen F, Demeester P, De Moor G. On the design of a generic and scalable multilayer software architecture for data flow management in the Intensive Care Unit. Methods of information in medicine 2003; 42 (01) 79-88.
  Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 12 Kawamoto K, Houlihan C, Balas A, Lobach D. Improving Clinical Practice using Clinical Decision Support Systems: A Systematic Review of Trials to identify Features Critical to Success. BMJ (Clinical research ed) 2005; 330 07494 765 +.
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 13 Van Hoecke S, Decruyenaere J, Danneels C, Taveirne K, Colpaert K, Hoste E. et al. Service-oriented subscription management of medical decision data in the Intensive Care Unit. Methods Inf Med 2008; 47 (04) 364-380.
  Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 14 Herasevich V, Pickering B, Dong Y, Peters S, Gajic O. Informatics Infrastructure for Syndrome Surveillance, Decision Support, Reporting, and Modeling of Critical Illness. Mayo Clinic Proc 2010; 85 (03) 247-254.
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 15 Sittig D, Wright A, Osheroff J, Middleton B, Teich J, Ash J. et al. Grand Challenges in Clinical Decision Support. J Biomed Inform 2008; 41 (02) 387-392.
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 16 Bardram J. Pervasive Healthcare as a Scientific Discipline. Methods Inf Med 2008; 47 (03) 178-185.
  Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 17 Triantafyllidis A, Koutkias K, Chouvarda I, Maglaveras N. An Open and Reconfigurable Wireless Sensor Network for Pervasive Health Monitoring. Methods Inf Med 2008; 47 (03) 229-234.
  Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 18 Blobel B. Architectural Approach to eHealth for Enabling Paradigm Changes in Health. Methods Inf Med 2010; 49 (02) 123-134.
  Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 19 Mitchell J, Gerdin U, Lindberg D, Lovis C, Martin-Sanchez F, Miller R. et al. 50 years of informatics research on decision support: What’s next. Methods Inf Med 2011; 50 (06) 525.
  Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 20 Peek N, Swift S. Intelligent data analysis for knowledge discovery, patient monitoring and quality assessment. Methods Inf Med 2012; 51 (04) 318.
  Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 21 Surján G. et al. How to use health informatics to manage the information overflow created by itself?. Methods Inf Med 2013; 52: 97-98.
  Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 22 Tentori M, Favela J. Activity-aware computing for healthcare. IEEE Pervasive Computing 2008; 7 (02) 51-57.
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 23 Tentori M, Hayes GR, Reddy M. Pervasive computing for hospital, chronic, and preventive care. Foundations and Trends in Human-Computer Interaction 2012; 5 (01) 1-95.
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 24 Bardram JE, Bossen C. Mobility work: The spatial dimension of collaboration at a hospital. Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW) 2005; 14 (02) 131-160.
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 25 Bardram E. The trouble with login: on usability and computer security in ubiquitous computing. Personal and Ubiquitous Computing 2005; 9 (06) 357-367.
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 26 Koch SH, Weir C, Westenskow D, Gondan M, Agutter J, Haar M. et al. Evaluation of the effect of information integration in displays for icu nurses on situation awareness and task completion time: A prospective randomized controlled study. Int J Med Inform 2013; 82 (08) 665-675.
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 27 Effken JA, Loeb RG, Kang Y, Lin ZC. Clinical information displays to improve ICU outcomes. Int J Med Inform 2008; 77 (11) 765-777.
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 28 Falke O, Rukzio E, Dietz U, Holleis P, Schmidt A. Mobile Services for Near Field Communication. Tech. Rep. LMU-MI-20071.; Vodafone Group Research and Development, Munich, Embedded Interaction Research Group, University of Munic, Computing Department, Lancaster University, UK, Fraunhofer IAIS, Sankt Augustin and b-it, University of Bonn. 2007
  Google Scholar
• 29 Ok K, Coskun V, Aydin MN, Ozdenizci B. Current benefits and future directions of NFC services. In: Proc of the International Conference on Education and Management Technology (ICEMT), 2010. IEEE. 2010: 334-338.
  Google Scholar
• 30 NFC-Forum. Available. http://www.nfc-forum.org.
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 31 Csapodi M, Nagy A. New applications for nfc devices. In: Mobile and Wireless Communications Summit, 2007. 16th IST. IEEE. 2007: 1-5.
  Google Scholar
• 32 Gamma E, Helm R, Johnson R, Vlissides J. Design Patterns: Elements of Reusable Object-Oriented Software. Addison-Wesley. 1994
  Google Scholar
• 33 Paulson L. Building Rich Web Applications with AJAX. Computer 2005; 38 (10) 14-17.
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 34 Wang G. Improving Data Transmission in Web Applications via the Translation between XML and JSON. In: 2011 Third International Conference on Communications and Mobile Computing. IEEE. 2011: 182-185.
  Google Scholar
• 35 Roland M. Software card emulation in NFC-enabled mobile phones: great advantage or security nightmare. Fourth International Workshop on Security and Privacy in Spontaneous Interaction and Mobile Phone Use. 2012
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 36 Madlmayr G, Langer J, Kantner C, Scharinger J. NFC devices: Security and privacy. In: Proc of the Third International Conference on Availability, Reliability and Security, 2008. ARES 08. IEEE. 2008: 642-647.
  Google Scholar
• 37 Ok K, Coskun V, Aydin MN, Ozdenizci B. Current benefits and future directions of NFC services. In: Proc of the International Conference on Education and Management Technology (ICEMT), 2010. IEEE. 2010: 334-338.
  Google Scholar
• 38 Want R. Near Field Communication. IEEE Pervasive Computing 2011; 10 (03) 4-7.
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 39 Farion K, Michalowski W, Wilk S, OSullivan D, Rubin S, Weiss D. Clinical decision support system for point of care use. Methods Inf Med 2009; 48: 381-390.
  Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar