<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><xml><records><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="7.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><ref-type>47</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Xiaomu Zhou</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Kai Zheng</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Mark S. Ackerman</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">David A Hanauer</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Cooperative documentation: the patient problem list as a nexus in electronic health records</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Proceedings of the ACM 2012 Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW ’12)</style></secondary-title></titles><keywords><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">health information</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">information access</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">medical informatics</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">medical information</style></keyword></keywords><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2012</style></year><pub-dates><date><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">01/02/2012</style></date></pub-dates></dates><urls><web-urls><url><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Complete</style></url></web-urls></urls><pages><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">853-862</style></pages><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><abstract><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">&lt;p&gt;The patient Problem List (PL) is a mandated documentation component of electronic health records supporting the longitudinal summarization of patient information in addition to facilitating the coordination of care by multidisciplinary medical teams. In this paper, we report an ethnographic study that examined the institutionalization of the PL. Specifically, we explored: (1) how different groups (primary care providers, inpatient hospitalists, specialists, and emergency doctors) perceived the purposes of the PL differently; (2) how these deviated perceptions might affect their use of the PL; and (3) how the technical design of the PL facilitated or hindered the clinical practices of these groups. We found significant ambiguity regarding the definition, benefits, and use of the PL across different groups. We also found that certain groups (e.g. primary care providers) had developed effective cooperative strategies regarding the use of the PL; however, suboptimal usage was common among other user types, which could have a profound impact on quality of care and safety. Based on these findings, we provide suggestions to improve the design of the PL, particularly on strengthening its support on longitudinal and cooperative clinical practices.&lt;/p&gt;
</style></abstract></record><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="7.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><ref-type>47</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Xiaomu Zhou</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Mark S. Ackerman</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Kai Zheng</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">CPOE workarounds, boundary objects, and assemblages</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI’11)</style></secondary-title></titles><keywords><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">assemblage</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">boundary object</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">CPOE</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">cscw</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">EHR</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">electronic patient records</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">health informatics</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">health information</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">information access</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">medical informatics</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">medical information</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">medical orders</style></keyword></keywords><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2011</style></year><pub-dates><date><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">5/2010</style></date></pub-dates></dates><urls><web-urls><url><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Complete</style></url></web-urls></urls><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><abstract><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">&lt;p&gt;We conducted an ethnographically based study at a large teaching hospital to examine clinician workarounds engendered by the adoption of a Computerized Prescribe Order Entry (CPOE) system. Specifically, we investigated how adoption of computerized systems may alter medical practice, order management in particular, as manifested through the working-around behavior developed by doctors and nurses to accommodate the changes in their day-to-day work environment. In this paper, we focus on clinicians’ workarounds, including those workarounds that gradually disappeared and those that have become routinized. Further, we extend the CSCW concept of boundary object (to &quot;assemblage&quot;) in order to understand the workarounds created with CPOE system use and the changing nature of clinical practices that are increasingly computerized.&lt;/p&gt;
</style></abstract></record><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="7.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><ref-type>47</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Xiaomu Zhou</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Mark S. Ackerman</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Kai Zheng</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Computerization and information assembling process: nursing work and CPOE adoption</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Proceedings of the 1st ACM International Health Informatics Symposium (IHI ’10)</style></secondary-title></titles><keywords><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">CPOE</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">electronic medical records</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">health informatics</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">information access</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">information assembling</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">information system</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">medical informatics</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">personal sheet</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">shift change</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">working document</style></keyword></keywords><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2010</style></year><pub-dates><date><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">11/2010</style></date></pub-dates></dates><urls><web-urls><url><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Complete</style></url></web-urls></urls><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><abstract><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">&lt;p&gt;This paper presents an ethnographic study investigating how nurses assemble information to start their shift’s work. We examined this process before and after the adoption of a Computerized Prescriber Order Entry (CPOE) system in an inpatient unit of a large teaching hospital. Before the CPOE adoption, nurses used several collaboratively-created group working documents to assist in this information assembling process; after the CPOE adoption, they mainly used the CPOE itself for their information needs. We found while computerization facilitated medical data assembling process and improved order handling practice, it also resulted in some information gaps in understanding patients in their larger care context. We analyzed what it means when the computerization of medical information turns local knowledge into more readily available and public information objects, as well as what that means for patients and patient care.&lt;/p&gt;
</style></abstract></record><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="7.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><ref-type>47</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Xiaomu Zhou</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Mark S. Ackerman</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Kai Zheng</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Doctors and Psychosocial Information: Records and Reuse in Inpatient Care</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI’10)</style></secondary-title></titles><keywords><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">EHR</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">electronic patient records</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">health informaticshealth informatics</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">information access</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">information reuse</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">medical information</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">medical records</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">organizational memory</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">physician information needs</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">psychosocial information</style></keyword></keywords><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2010</style></year></dates><urls><web-urls><url><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Complete</style></url></web-urls></urls><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><abstract><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">&lt;p&gt;We conducted a field-based study at a large teaching hospital to examine doctors’ use and documentation of patient care information, with a special focus on a patient’s psychosocial information. We were particularly interested in the gaps between the medical work and any representations of the patient. The paper describes how doctors record this information for immediate and long-term use. We found that doctors documented a considerable amount of psychosocial information in their electronic health records (EHR) system. Yet, we also observed that such information was recorded selectively, and a medicalized view-point is a key contributing factor. Our study shows how missing or problematic representations of a patient affect work activities and patient care. We accordingly suggest that EHR systems could be made more usable and useful in the long run, by supporting both representations of medical processes and of patients.&lt;/p&gt;</style></abstract></record><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="7.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><ref-type>47</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Xiaomu Zhou</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Mark S. Ackerman</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Kai Zheng</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">I just don&#039;t know why it&#039;s gone: Maintaining Informal Information Use in Inpatient Care</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI&#039;09)</style></secondary-title></titles><keywords><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">CPOE</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">electronic patient records</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">informal information</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">medical informatics.</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">medical records</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">organizational memory</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">psychosocial information</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">shift change</style></keyword></keywords><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2009</style></year><pub-dates><date><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">04/2009</style></date></pub-dates></dates><urls><web-urls><url><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Complete</style></url></web-urls></urls><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><abstract><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">&lt;p&gt;We conducted a field-based study examining informal nursing information. We examined the use of this information before and after the adoption of a CPOE (Computerized Provider Order Entry) system in an inpatient unit of a large teaching hospital. Before CPOE adoption,&lt;br&gt;nurses used paper working documents to detail psychosocial information about patients; after the CPOE adoption, they did not use paper or digital notes as was planned. The paper describes this process and analyses how several interlocked reasons contributed to the loss of this information in written form. We found that a change in physical location, sufficient convenience, visibility of the information, and permanency of information account for some, but not all, of the outcome. As well, we found that computerization of the nursing data led to a shift in the politics of the information itself – the nurses no longer had a cohesive agreement about the kinds of data to enter into the system. The findings address the requirements of healthcare computerization to support both formal and informal work practices, respecting the nature of nursing work and the politics of information inherent in complex medical work.&lt;/p&gt;</style></abstract></record><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="7.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><ref-type>5</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Wayne G Lutters</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Mark S. Ackerman</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Xiaomu Zhou</style></author></authors><secondary-authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Jones, William P.</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Jaime Teevan</style></author></secondary-authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Group information management</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Personal Information Management</style></secondary-title></titles><keywords><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">group information</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">personal information management</style></keyword></keywords><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2006</style></year></dates><urls><web-urls><url><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Complete</style></url></web-urls></urls><publisher><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">University of Washington Press</style></publisher><pub-location><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Seattle, WA</style></pub-location><pages><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">236–248</style></pages><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><abstract><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">&lt;p&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Activities of PIM are often embedded in group or organizational contexts. To work effectively within a group, an individual must manage information not only for his or her personal use but also to share with other members of the group. Obviously, one would like to leverage the activities of others around. Being able to obtain telephone numbers, schedule group meetings, determine the availability of one’s peers, and obtain important collaborative information is invaluable. What are the issues, if any, in leveraging the work of others, in order to incorporate their calendar, contacts, and other information into one’s own PIM system? And what would be involved in sharing one’s own data for use by others?&amp;nbsp;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;This chapter reviews the host of issues involved in the collaborative use of personal information. Topics covered include motivation, adoption patterns, interaction styles, control over personal information, privacy, and trust. The goal is to facilitate sharing personal information by considering these issues; fully considered, they can enable the cooperative adoption and use of tools to support group information management (GIM).&amp;nbsp;&lt;/p&gt;</style></abstract></record></records></xml>