Eliciting requirements for a tablet-based data entry and reporting system for use inclinical microbiology laboratories to facilitate blood culture analysis: a case study

Lasse Lefevre Samson
Department of Health Science and Technology, Aalborg University, Aalborg, Denmark

Louise Bilenberg Pape-Haugaard
Department of Health Science and Technology, Aalborg University, Aalborg, Denmark

Ole K. Hejlesen
Department of Health Science and Technology, Aalborg University, Aalborg, Denmark/Department of Health and Nursing Science, University of Agder, Kristiansand, Norway/Department of Computer Science, University of Tromsø, Tromsø, Norway

Ladda ner artikel

Ingår i: Scandinavian Conference on Health Informatics 2013; Copenhagen; Denmark; August 20; 2013

Linköping Electronic Conference Proceedings 91:16, s. 79-82

Visa mer +

Publicerad: 2013-08-21

ISBN: 978-91-7519-518-6

ISSN: 1650-3686 (tryckt), 1650-3740 (online)


Sepsis is a large health care burden on a global scale with 1.8 million documented cases yearly. Furthermore; sepsis is associated with a high mortality rate. However; an early initiation of the correct antimicrobial treatment improves the survival rate.

A new molecular based diagnostic test named MultiplexBCT is currently under development. Furthermore; a tablet-based data entry and reporting system is being developed to facilitate the workflow of the MultiplexBCT test.

This study identified system requirements for the tablet-based data entry and reporting system through an observational study conducted at two clinical microbiology laboratories inthe US. Three system requirements were elicited;communication of data with the laboratory information system; communication of test results to the treating staff; and the support of barcodes.

The three system requirements form the foundation for further development of the tablet-based data entry and reporting system.


Medical Informatics; Sepsis; Handheld Computer


[1] Martin GS; Mannino DM; Eaton S; Moss M. The epidemiology of sepsis in the United States from 1979 through 2000. N Engl J Med. 2003: 348(16): 1546-54.

[2] Slade E; Tamber PS; Vincent JL. The Surviving Sepsis Campaign: raising awareness to reduce mortality. Crit Care. 2003: 7(1): 1-2.

[3] Dellinger RP; Levy MM; Carlet JM; Bion J; Parker MM; Jaeschke R; Reinhart K; Angus DC; Brun-Buisson C; Beale R; Calandra T; Dhainaut JF; Gerlach H; Harvey M; Marini JJ; Marshall J; Ranieri M; Ramsay G; Sevransky J; Thompson BT; Townsend S; Vender JS; Zimmerman JL; Vincent JL; for the International Surviving Sepsis Campaign Guidelines Committee. Surviving Sepsis Campaign: International guidelines for management of severe sepsis and septic shock: 2008. Crit Care Med 2008: 36(1): 296-327.

[4] Angus DC; Linde-Zwirble WT; Lidicker J; Clermont G; Carcillo J; Pinsky MR. Epidemiology of severe sepsis in the United States: analysis of incidence; outcome; and associated costs of care. Crit Care Med. 2001: 29(7): 1303-10.

[5] Kumar A; Roberts D; Wood KE; Light B; Parrillo JE; Sharma S; Suppes R; Feinstein D; Zanotti S; Taiberg L; Gurka D; Kumar A; Cheang M. Duration of hypotension before initiation of effective antimicrobial therapy is the critical determinant of survival in human septic shock. Crit Care Med 2006: 34(6): 1589-96.

[6] Kumar A; Ellis P; Arabi Y; Roberts D; Light B; Parrillo JE; Dodek P; Wood G; Kumar A; Simon D; Peters C; Ahsan M; Chateau D; Cooperative Antimicrobial Therapy of Septic Shock Database Research Group. Initiation of inappropriate antimicrobial therapy results in a fivefold reduction of survival in human septic shock. Chest. 2009: 136(5): 1237-48.

[7] Stefani S. Diagnostic techniques in bloodstream infections: where are we going? Int J Antimicrob Agents 2009: 34 (Suppl 4): S9-12.

[8] Mancini N; Carletti S; Ghidoli N; Cichero P; Burioni R; Clementi M. The Era of Molecular and Other Non-Culture-Based Methods in Diagnosis of Sepsis. Clin Microbiol Rev. 2010: 23(1): 235-51

[9] Andrade SS; Bispo PJM; Gales AC. Advances in the microbiological diagnosis of sepsis. Shock 2008: 30(1): 41-6.

[10]Beekmann SE; Diekema DJ; Chapin KC; Doern GV. Effects of rapid detection of bloodstream infections on length of hospitalization and hospital charges. J Clin Microbiol. 2003: 41(7): 3119-25.

[11]Ly T; Gulia J; Pyrgos V; Waga M; Shoham S. Impact upon clinical outcomes of translation of PNA FISH-generated laboratory data from the clinical microbiology bench to bedside in real time. Ther Clin Risk Manag. 2008: 4(3): 637-40.

[12]Prgomet M; Georgiou A; Westbrook JI. The Impact of Mobile Handheld Technology on Hospital Physicians’ Work Practices and Patient Care: A Systematic Review. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2009: 16: 792-801.

[13]Zheng K; Haftel HM; Hirschl RB; O’Reilly M; Hanauer DA. Quantifying the impact of health IT implementations on clinical workflow: a new methodological perspective. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2010: 17(4): 454-61.

[14]Berg M. Implementing information systems in health care organizations: myths and challenges. Int J Med Inform. 2001: 64(2-3): 143-56.

[15]Kvale S. InterView: en introduktion til det kvalitative forskningsinterview. Hans Reitzels Forlag; 2006.

[16]Ammenwerth E; Buchauer A; Bludau B; Haux R. Mobile information and communication tools in the hospital. Int J Med Inform. 2000: 57(1): 21-40.

[17]Ash JS; Berg M; Coiera E. Some unintended consequences of information technology in health care: the nature of patient care information system-related errors. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2004: 11(2): 104-12.

Citeringar i Crossref