PubMed Health⌕ Search
Home/Archive/PubMed

PubMed · 16518952

Shared records: towards collaborative working with families.

Edward Alan Glasper·Christine Wilkes Holmes·Karen L Brown·Jan Newton
View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

In response to government policy on integrated records, common assessment and information sharing, health and social care professionals who work with children and young people are reviewing how patient documentation is designed, implemented and evaluated. A survey of members of a multiprofessional team within a regional children's unit was carried out to inform the development of collaborative (shared) patient documentation. A focus group activity using the nominal group technique generated information to construct a questionnaire which was piloted and sent to 125 key informants identified using 'snowballing' technique (Blacktop 1996). Of the 62 respondents (a 50 per cent response rate) only four did not support a patient to be accessed by all who provide care. Sixty per cent strongly agreed or agreed that any new record design should provide space for contributions from the child/young person and the carer/parent. Despite this clear consensus, opposition by some gate keepers may still slow the introduction of shared records in children's services.

Explore related subjects

Access to InformationAttitude of Health PersonnelChildChild Health ServicesConsensusCooperative BehaviorDocumentationFocus GroupsForms and Records ControlHumansMedical Records Systems, ComputerizedMedical Staff, HospitalNurse CliniciansNursing Methodology ResearchNursing RecordsNursing Staff, HospitalParentsPatient Care TeamPediatric NursingPediatricsProfessional-Family RelationsSocial SupportSurveys and QuestionnairesJournal Article

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Edward Alan Glasper, Christine Wilkes Holmes, Karen L Brown, Jan Newton. 2006. Shared records: towards collaborative working with families.. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/16518952/

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

PubMed2007

The prevalence and inaccessibility of Internet references in the biomedical literature at the time of publication.

OBJECTIVES: To determine the prevalence and inaccessibility of Internet references in the bibliography of biomedical publications when first released in PubMed. METHODS: During a one-month observational study period (Feb 21 to Mar 21, 2006) the Internet citations from a 20% random sample of all forthcoming publications released in PubMed during the previous day were identified. Attempts to access the referenced Internet citations were completed within one day and inaccessible Internet citations were recorded. RESULTS: The study included 4,699 publications from 844 different journals. Among the 141,845 references there were 840 (0.6%) Internet citations. One or more Internet references were cited in 403 (8.6%) articles. From the 840 Internet references, 11.9% were already inaccessible within two days after an article's release to the public. CONCLUSION: The prevalence of Internet citations in journals included in PubMed is small (<1%); however, the inaccessibility rate at the time of publication is considered substantial. Authors, editors, and publishers need to take responsibility for providing accurate and accessible Internet references.

Access to Information↗
PubMed2007

Securing electronic health records without impeding the flow of information.

OBJECTIVE: We present an integrated set of technologies, known as the Hippocratic Database, that enable healthcare enterprises to comply with privacy and security laws without impeding the legitimate management, sharing, and analysis of personal health information. APPROACH: The Hippocratic Database approach to securing electronic health records involves (1) active enforcement of fine-grained data disclosure policies using query modification techniques, (2) efficient auditing of past database access to verify compliance with policies and track security breaches, (3) data mining algorithms that preserve privacy by randomizing information at the individual level, (4) de-identification of personal health data using an optimal method of k-anonymization, and (5) information sharing across autonomous data sources using cryptographic protocols. CONCLUSIONS: Our research confirms that policies concerning the disclosure of electronic health records can be reliably and efficiently enforced and audited at the database level. We further demonstrate that advanced data mining and anonymization techniques can be employed to analyze aggregate health records without revealing individual patient identities. Finally, we show that web services and commutative encryption can be used to share sensitive information selectively among autonomous entities without compromising security or privacy.

Access to Information↗