Collaborative Affordances of Medical Records

Abstract

Abstract. This article proposes the concept of Collaborative Affordances to describe physical and digital properties (i.e., affordances) of an artifact, which affords coordination and collaboration in work. Collaborative Affordances build directly on Gibson (1977)'s affordance concept and extends the work by Sellen and Harper (2003) on the affordances of physical paper. Sellen and Harper describe how the physical properties of paper affords easy reading, navigation, mark-up, and writing, but focuses, we argue, mainly on individual use of paper and digital technology. As an extension to this, Collaborative Affordances focusses on the properties of physical and digital artifacts that affords collaborative activities. We apply the concept of Collaborative Affordances to the study of paper-based and electronic patient records in hospitals and detail how they afford collaboration through four types of Collaborative Affordances; being portable across patient wards and the entire hospital, by providing collocated access, by providing a shared overview of medical data, and by giving clinicians ways to maintain mutual awareness. We then discuss how the concept of Collaborative Affordances can be used in the design of new technology by providing a design study of a 'Hybrid Patient Record' (HyPR), which is designed to seamlessly blend and integrate paper-based with electronic patient records.

Physical Versus Digital Sticky Notes in Collaborative Ideation

“…In relation to turn-taking, we further look at how the digital versus physical material affects alternation between individual and group idea generation, as mentioned by Korde and Paulus (2017). Our work is also influenced by Tang et al (2011) and Chulvi et al (2017), who investigate how moving from a physical to a digital setup influences creativity in different sketching environments, and by work on artefact mediation, and affordances for interaction at large (Baerentsen and Trettvik 2002, Gaver 1992, Badram and Houben 2018.…”

“…In that regard, we also refrain from claiming that sticky notes are the ideal tool for ideation. Rather, based on the fact that they are a popular choice for design processes and ideation, and a considerable amount of literature exists on them, we use sticky notes as a concrete example to investigate differences in affordance and use of digital and physical artefacts for collaboration (see also Badram and Houben 2018). As design is a ubiquitous, collaborative and highly material activity (Vyas et al 2009), our motivation for doing this work is to understand how changing the material used in a design process changes the design and collaborative practice, and whether these changes explain the limited use of digital sticky note systems in current design teams.…”

Time to mandate systems that promote collaborative working with computerised medical record systems, at a time of general practitioner shortage

“…Many have recognised that case discussions between clinicians are an important part of learning, with no widespread adoption of other technologies to replace this dialogue 2. By design, many CMR systems block the collaborative affordances of the paper record, for example, simultaneous viewing or superimposed synchronous or asynchronous discussion or annotation, which has the status of exploratory discussion 3. Social media are well-established, but as yet there is a very little exploration of how these technologies might be used to enhance case discussion.…”

Proof-of-Familiarity: A Privacy-Preserved Blockchain Scheme for Collaborative Medical Decision-Making

“…Around 63% of patients visit an online platform for medical help and 62.4% of them trust their doctor for data sharing [13]. Lack of participants, sloppy stakeholder's identity securing mechanisms, corruption in decision picking mechanisms, lack of accountability, data manipulation, delayed communication, and corrupted mediums have been recognized as the major worries of collaborative medical decision-making [14][15][16][17][18][19]. Despite aforesaid challenges, collaboration can always upgrade the existing healthcare amenity.…”

“…Clinical data, medical decisions, and patient identities are being manipulated and distributed without proper acknowledgment and consent. Existing collaborative healthcare decision-making has the following limitations [14][15][16][17][18][19][21][22][23]:…”