How to make the impossible, possible: Facilitating a shared healthcare system based on user perspectives
Authors
Jensen, Frederikke Bøgh ; Ladefoged, Kathrine Tornbjerg
Term
4. term
Education
Publication year
2020
Pages
803
Abstract
Denne kandidatafhandling inden for techno-antropologi undersøger, hvordan klinikere oplever adgang til patientoplysninger, og hvordan deling af sådanne oplysninger kan fungere på tværs af de tre danske sundhedstilbud uden for almindelig åbningstid. Studiet er gennemført i samarbejde med Center for Prehospital and Emergency Research. Vi brugte kvalitative, etnografiske metoder: Vi fulgte arbejdet i praksis (deltagende observation) og gennemførte semistrukturerede interviews med klinikere og relevante IT-medarbejdere. I analysen hentede vi inspiration fra Grounded Theory, hvor begreber opbygges ud fra data, og udviklede en analytisk ramme. Vi anvendte også idéen om grænseobjekter til at forstå elektroniske patientjournaler som fælles værktøjer, som forskellige faggrupper kan bruge og fortolke sammen. Overordnet vurderede klinikerne, at den nuværende adgang til patientdata er tilstrækkelig, men med plads til forbedring. De fremhævede, at eventuel fremtidig deling på tværs af sundhedstilbud bør præsentere oplysninger som aggregerede (sammenfattede), strukturerede (velorganiserede) og standardiserede (ensartede) for at undgå for meget information.
This Techno-Anthropology master’s thesis examines how clinicians experience access to patient information and how sharing that information might work across the three Danish out-of-hours healthcare services. The study was conducted in collaboration with the Center for Prehospital and Emergency Research. We used qualitative, ethnographic methods: we observed everyday work (participatory observations) and conducted semi-structured interviews with clinicians and relevant IT staff. For analysis, we drew on Grounded Theory—building concepts from the data—to develop an analytical framework. We also used the idea of boundary objects to understand electronic medical records as shared tools that different professional groups can use and interpret together. Overall, clinicians considered current access to patient data sufficient, but saw room for improvement. They emphasized that any future sharing across healthcare settings should present information in aggregated (summarized), structured (well organized), and standardized (consistent) ways to avoid information overload.
[This abstract was generated with the help of AI]
Documents