Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-mlc7c Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-02T19:00:46.314Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

11 - Data capture direct from doctors

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  30 September 2009

Simon P. Frostick
Affiliation:
Department of Orthopaedic and Accident Surgery, University Hospital, Nottingham, UK
Philip J. Radford
Affiliation:
Department of Orthopaedic and Accident Surgery, University Hospital, Nottingham, UK
W. Angus Wallace
Affiliation:
Department of Orthopaedic and Accident Surgery, University Hospital, Nottingham, UK
Get access

Summary

Introduction

In 1987, the Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Manchester University set out to develop a system for recording and classifying the work passing through the academic clinical unit. Like many others, we were tired of leafing through theatre logbooks to assemble series of patients for study, of depending on patently inaccurate hospital activity analysis (HAA) statistics to tell us what our workload had been, and of relying on rosy memory to retrieve our complications. Moreover, like many others, we had tried paper-based storage systems but found them, in the maelstrom of orthopaedic and trauma work in an understaffed unit, to produce more resentment than usable data.

The rising availability of computers allowed many possible solutions, but all dogged by one question – who keys in the data? We could raise a little money for hardware, though not enough for an extensive network, but salaries for data clerks were always out of the question and our doctors and secretaries were already overworked. In almost all orthopaedic units in the UK, there has for many years been a tradition of typed casenotes, based on dictation by doctors at the time of consultation. So the secretary is already transmitting diagnostic information through a keyboard – why not store the data as a by-product of her/his work?

This has remained the basis of our strategy; it has stood the test of time in several busy orthopaedic units in the last three (at the time of writing) years, with a high level of acceptability from secretaries and doctors alike.

Type
Chapter
Information
Medical Audit , pp. 138 - 155
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 1993

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×