Clinical Data Management*

Ausman, Robert K.; Baer, Garth D.; McGuire, M. R.; Marks, Richard A.; Ewart, R. J.; Carey, John C.; R, West

doi:10.1111/j.1749-6632.1965.tb11719.x

Cited by 8 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Ausman and associates [ 2 ] at Roswell Park Memorial Institute in Buffalo, New York, reported in 1966 a prototype HIS operating in one 42-bed nursing station that provided care to patients with malignant diseases. They collected all data for the patient's history and nurses' and physicians' notes on punched cards or by transcription to punched paper tape for entry into the computer.…”

Section: Roswell Park Memorial Institute In Buffalo New Yorkmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The Early History of Hospital Information Systems for Inpatient Care in the United States

Collen¹,

Miller

2015

Health Informatics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the 1960s, large hospital systems began to acquire mainframe computers, primarily for business and administrative functions. In the 1970s, lower-cost, minicomputers enabled placement of smaller, special purpose clinical application systems in various hospital departments. Early time-sharing applications used display terminals located at nursing stations. In the 1960s and 1970s, a small number of pioneering institutions, many of them academic teaching hospitals with federal funding, developed their own hospital information systems (HISs). Vendors then acquired and marketed some of the successful academic prototypes. In the 1980s, widespread availability of local area networks fostered development of large HISs with advanced database management capabilities, generally using a mix of large mini-and microcomputers linked to large numbers of clinical workstations and bedside terminals. When federal funding for HIS development diminished in the mid-1990s, academic centers decreased, and commercial vendors increased their system development efforts. Interoperability became a main design requirement for HISs and for electronic patient record (EPR) systems. Beyond 2010, open system architectures and interconnection standards hold promise for full interchange of information between multi-vendor HISs and EPR systems and their related subsystems.In 1962, the American Hospital Association surveyed more than 7,000 registered hospitals regarding their usage of computer data processing applications. They found that only 7 % of hospitals used data processing equipment. Fewer than 1 % of smaller hospitals (<100 beds) used computer data processing, and 33 % of larger hospitals (at least 500 beds) used it. Among hospitals with electronic data processing capabilities, 63 % used it for payroll, 53 % for inventory control, and 44 % for patient billing. Only 28 % of such hospitals used data processing for patients' medical records; and 14 % used it for medical research [ 61 ].During the 1960s and 1970s, most American HISs focused on automation of hospital administrative services. Ball [ 6 ] categorized the earliest (1960s) operational HISs as the First Generation Level-1 HIS. These encompassed a basic set of inpatient-oriented computer applications, including: an ADT (admission-dischargetransfer) application with bed status and census reporting; an order/requisition entry, communication, and charge collection application; and an inquiry application for today's charges for demand bill purposes. Ball characterized changes in the 1970s as Second Generation Level-1 systems, with enhancements that included: computer-assigned patient identifi cation; nursing order-set entry, nursing notes and care plans, medication schedules and medication monitoring; laboratory-specimen collection lists and labels; order entry and results reporting; scheduling for patients, radiology procedures, and the operating room; medical records indexing, abstracts, and chart locations; diet-list preparation; utilization review; and doctors' registries. An advanced ...

show abstract

Section: Roswell Park Memorial Institute In Buffalo New Yorkmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…(2) More diffi cult was the automation of a more complex function such as collecting and storing a patient's medical history. (3) Very diffi cult was constructing a complex function such as a medical database.…”

Section: Summary and Commentarymentioning

confidence: 99%