An organisational semiotics inspired information architecture: pervasive healthcare as a case study

Information architecture (IA) is defined as high level information requirements of an organisation. It is applied in areas such as information systems development, enterprise architecture, business processes management and organisational change management. Still, the lack of methods and theories prevents information architecture becoming a distinct discipline. Healthcare organisation is always seen as information intensive organisation, moreover in a pervasive healthcare environment. Pervasive healthcare aims to provide healthcare services to anyone, anywhere and anytime by incorporating mobile devices and wireless network. Information architecture hence plays an important role in information provisioning within the context of pervasive healthcare in order to support decision making and communication between clinician and patients. Organisational semiotics is one of the social technical approaches that contemplate information through the norms or activities performed within an organisation prior to pervasive healthcare implementation. This paper proposes a conceptual design of information architecture for pervasive healthcare. It is illustrated with a scenario of mental health patient monitoring.

The prevalence and nature of prescribing and monitoring errors in English general practice – a retrospective case note review

Objective To determine the prevalence and nature of prescribing and monitoring errors in general practices in England. Design Retrospective case note review of unique medication items prescribed over a 12 month period to a 2% random sample of patients. Mixed effects logistic regression was used to analyse the data. Setting Fifteen general practices across three primary care trusts in England. Data sources Examination of 6048 unique prescription items prescribed over the previous 12 months for 1777 patients. Main outcome measures Prevalence of prescribing and monitoring errors, and severity of errors, using validated definitions. Results Prescribing and/or monitoring errors were detected in 4.9% (296/6048) of all prescription items (95% confidence interval 4.4 - 5.5%). The vast majority of errors were of mild to moderate severity, with 0.2% (11/6048) of items having a severe error. After adjusting for covariates, patient-related factors associated with an increased risk of prescribing and/or monitoring errors were: age less than 15 (Odds Ratio (OR) 1.87, 1.19 to 2.94, p=0.006) or greater than 64 years (OR 1.68, 1.04 to 2.73, p=0.035), and higher numbers of unique medication items prescribed (OR 1.16, 1.12 to 1.19, p<0.001). Conclusion Prescribing and monitoring errors are common in English general practice, although severe errors are unusual. Many factors increase the risk of error. Having identified the most common and important errors, and the factors associated with these, strategies to prevent future errors should be developed based on the study findings.