Information needs within our organization differ depending on the roles undertaken by each. For instance, the administrator of the health information systems requires information that should be added to the system. The information added in the system is gathered from all stakeholders of the organization (Raghupathi & Raghupathi, 2014). The physicians require information about patient’s past health information; results derived from laboratory tests and response to treatment. Laboratory technicians require information about how to carry out and interpret laboratory tests, and past information that can help to detect emerging or existing diseases (Raghupathi & Raghupathi, 2014). In short, different individuals in the organization have different information needs. The main impact of the differences on the health information technology implementation is that all the unique needs must be incorporated into the system. In other words, the system must contain information that suits the unique information needs all the different individuals. As such, the implementation process requires the contribution of all individuals in the organization (Raghupathi & Raghupathi, 2014).

Information flow across the HIT systems in our organization supports evidence-based practice in several ways. Firstly, it facilitates quick exchange of information about infectious diseases that are detected and information about how to handle the situation. Secondly, the flow facilitates sharing of data between health care providers about patient diagnosis (Hynes et al., 2010). In addition, the flow of information allows healthcare providers to access information quickly about the suitable treatment methods of treating a particular illness. However, the system has a negative impact on the quality of healthcare provided in cases where some of the healthcare providers are not aware of how to use it (Hynes et al., 2010).

References

Hynes, D. M., Weddle, T., Smith, N. Whittier, E., Atkins, D. & Francis, J. (2010). Use of Health

Information Technology to Advance Evidence-Based Care: Lessons from the VA QUERI Program. J Gen Intern Med, 25(1), 44–49.

Raghupathi, W. & Raghupathi (2014). Big data analytics in healthcare: promise and potential.

Health Information Science and Systems 2014, 2(3), 113-127

Assignment 2: Comparing Nursing Informatics pioneers

The current section attempts to make a comparison between two pioneers of Nursing Informatics (NI) namely, Patricia Abbott and Ida M. Androwich. The two pioneers of NI have different professional accomplishments. To start with, the early work of Abbott contributed immensely in the development of the NI Specialty. Abbott was involved in the establishment and documenting the original standards that guide and define the scope of the NI (AMIA, 2014a). Also, she worked with the American Nurses Credentialing Center in developing the first NI certification exams. She worked at the University of Maryland as the Director of Graduate Programs in NI between 1998 and 2003. In 2004, she worked at the Hopkins School of Nursing and later moved to the Global Health Informatics where she worked as a frontline caregiver in areas where resources were scarce (AMIA, 2014a). In the aforementioned organizations, she applied knowledge management approaches and low-bandwidth technologies in the establishment of health information systems. Currently, she works as a Co-Director of World health Organization, Pan American Health Organization and Collaborating Center for Nursing. In addition, she works as an assistant professor at the Johns Hopkins School of Nursing (AMIA, 2014a).

On the other hand, Androwich currently works at Loyola University Chicago as a professor where she teaches graduate courses in Population-Based Infection Control, Systems, and Health Care Informatics. Androwich graduated from the same university with a BSN and later studied MS in Public Health Nursing in the University of Illinois. She has a Ph.D. in Public Health from the same university (AMIA, 2014b). She has written and published books on Health Care Informatics that have spread internationally. She has contributed in standardizing healthcare vocabularies and served as one of the leaders in different organizations, including AONE Technology Task Force, the AMIA-NIWG Leadership Group, ANA’s NIDSEC Committee and TIGER. She worked as a Co-Chair of the National Alliance of Health Information Technology Board and the Expert Panel in NI (AMIA, 2014b). She also works with the American Academy of Nursing Workforce.

The contributions of Abbott and Androwich have influenced the nursing practice in several ways. Both have contributed immensely in the development of HIT that is currently widely used in health care organizations. They have also authored books that are used as sources of information on NI (AMIA, 2014a; AMIA, 2014b). As educators, the two have been involved in passing information to many people about the NI and HIT, and they have been widely involved in the advocacy for the implementation of HIT systems in organizations. Androwich has made a major contribution in the area of terminology development. She has been contributed imensely to in the standardization of the nursing terminologies (AMIA, 2014b).

Abbott and Androwich have made specific contributions to the field of NI. As mentioned earlier, the contribution of Abbott led to the establishment of the NI specialty. The contribution of her early work led to the establishment of the content of NI that learners rely on today. Her contribution also gave a starting point to the development of standards and guidelines that define the scope of for the NI. As well, her contribution has shaped the design of the certification exams for the NI (AMIA, 2014a). The contribution of Androwich in standardizing nursing standards has shaped the NI since learners and nurses and able to use harmonized terminologies. Standardization has helped to minimize the confusion that could be there if the standard terminologies and concepts in the area of NI are not harmonized (AMIA, 2014b). The work of Androwich and Abbott has played a significant role in making NI a distinct and major field of study in nursing. The two pioneers have contributed in translating theory on NI into practice.

The experiences of Abbott and Androwich teach several lessons. Firstly, the experiences of the two pioneers indicate that NI is important in nursing since it lays the basis for the integration of computer technology, information science and nursing science to manage and communicate knowledge, wisdom and information in nursing. The two highlight the importance of embracing NI in healthcare organizations as information technology advances. Their experiences also indicate that the field of NI is still evolving, and further research is needed. As such, we should proceed with the research even after the pioneers. Further, their experiences highlight the importance of advocacy in the development of the concept of NI and the application of the concept in healthcare organizations (Thede, 2012).

Some of the ideas and skills demonstrated by these leaders are applicable to my professional practice. As suggested by the two pioneers, it is possible to gain deep understanding of the field of NI and to apply the knowledge in enhancing HIT system in our organizations. I can also use my knowledge and skills in sensitizing healthcare workers who resist the change in our organization about the importance of implementing HIT systems. As (Hart, 2011) suggests, I would address both benefits and costs of the system. Just as the pioneers did, I can be able to extend my advocacy through writing and publishing materials to be read by learners and the healthcare providers in our organization.

References

AMIA (2014a). Nursing Informatics Pioneers: Patricia Abbott. Retrieved from

http://www.amia.org/programs/working-groups/nursing-informatics/nursing-informatics-pioneers-patricia-abbott

AMIA (2014b). Nursing Informatics Pioneers: Ida M. Androwich. Retrieved from

http://www.amia.org/nursing-informatics/nursing-informatics-pioneers-ida-m-androwich

Hart, M. D. (2011). Compelled by demand, driven by experience. Nursing Management, 42(5),

21-23.

Thede, L. (2012) Informatics: Where Is It? OJIN: The Online Journal of Issues in Nursing, Vol.

17 (1), 27-41

Assignment 3: Controlled Terminology and Standards

When sharing data across systems, health care organizations are likely to experience the problem of exposure of private information to unintended persons. Private information for a healthcare provider or a patient that is intended to be confidential is likely to leak to other people sharing data in the health information system (Vest & Gamm, 2010). Secondly, the data shared in the health information technologies is not very secure; in case the systems get damaged, there is a likelihood of losing important data (Vest & Gamm, 2010).

Interoperability process involves the replacement of the traditional systems that are based on papers with electronic systems. In some cases, health care providers who are used to the traditional systems are reluctant to adopt the new systems, and they may even resist the change (Kadry Sanderson & Macario, 2010). Lack of standard language between all the healthcare providers is also a major challenge. As such, some complex terms and phrases incorporated in the system may not be understood by all users. For instance, physicians may be using terminologies that are not known to the laboratory technicians (Kadry et al., 2010).

Health care organizations can address the interoperability challenges in various ways. Firstly, the resistance to change or to adopt the new systems can be addressed through training the health workers how to operate the systems and to sensitize them about its importance. Further, all stakeholders to the change should be fully consulted throughout the implementation process to make sure that their views are addressed and incorporated in designing the systems (Kadry et al., 2010). The problem of lack of adequate funding can be addressed through seeking financial aid from government agencies and other organizations. The problem of lack of standard language among the healthcare providers can be addressed through adding interpretations to terminologies in the system (Kadry et al., 2010).

References

Kadry, B., Sanderson, I. C. & Macario, A. (2010). Challenges that limit meaningful use of health

Information technology. Curr Opin Anaesthesiol, 23(2), 184-92

Vest, J. R. & Gamm, L. D. (2010). Health information exchange: persistent challenges and new

strategies. J Am Med Inform Assoc, 17(3), 288–294.

Need assistance with this?

CLICK BUTTON TO ORDER NOW