Stand-alone laboratory information systems versus laboratory modules incorporated in the electronic health record

The increasing availability of laboratory information management modules within enterprise electronic health record solutions has resulted in some institutional administrators deciding which laboratory information system will be used to manage workflow within the laboratory, often with minimal input...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Archives of pathology & laboratory medicine (1976) 2015-03, Vol.139 (3), p.311-318
Hauptverfasser: Sinard, John H, Castellani, William J, Wilkerson, Myra L, Henricks, Walter H
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 318
container_issue 3
container_start_page 311
container_title Archives of pathology & laboratory medicine (1976)
container_volume 139
creator Sinard, John H
Castellani, William J
Wilkerson, Myra L
Henricks, Walter H
description The increasing availability of laboratory information management modules within enterprise electronic health record solutions has resulted in some institutional administrators deciding which laboratory information system will be used to manage workflow within the laboratory, often with minimal input from the pathologists. This article aims to educate pathologists on many of the issues and implications this change may have on laboratory operations, positioning them to better evaluate and represent the needs of the laboratory during this decision-making process. The experiences of the authors, many of their colleagues, and published observations relevant to this debate are summarized. There are multiple dimensions of the interdependency between the pathology laboratory and its information system that must be factored into the decision. Functionality is important, but management authority and gap-ownership are also significant elements to consider. Thus, the pathologist must maintain an active role in the decision-making process to ensure the success of the laboratory.
doi_str_mv 10.5858/arpa.2013-0711-SO
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>gale_proqu</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1660030735</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><galeid>A510937155</galeid><sourcerecordid>A510937155</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c465t-5e30b32a21571b62df8673b9ee2bdf9a8a754c38769ae845bdc5a27189dbd7d3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNptkl9rFDEUxYModq1-AF9kQJC-ZM2fyWTmsRStQmEftu8hk9zpTslMtklG2G_fxK3aypKHcC-_cwgnB6GPlKxFK9qvOuz1mhHKMZGU4u3mFVpRUXPMaCNeoxUhhOOua8UZehfjfR47xuhbdMaEZDVhcoUetknPFmvnZ6ic7n3QyYdDNc6DD5NOo5-reIgJplj9ghCX-JyavF0cxEwbH_ZlCzYPVdpBBQ5MCn4eTbUD7dKuCpAp-x69GbSL8OHpPke337_dXv3AN5vrn1eXN9jUjUhYACc9Z5pRIWnfMDu0jeR9B8B6O3S61VLUhrey6TS0teitEZpJ2na2t9Lyc3RxtN0H_7BATGoaowHn9Ax-iYo2TU6HSC4y-vk_9N4vYc6PKxTvGJVU_qPutANV8klBm2KqLgUlHZdUFC98grqDGcLvjIcxr1_w6xN8Pham0ZwUfHkmOCYbvVvKT8WXID2CJvgYAwxqH8ZJh4OiRJX6qFIfVeqjSn3UdpM1n56SWPoJ7F_Fn77wR8ESwQU</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1663921717</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Stand-alone laboratory information systems versus laboratory modules incorporated in the electronic health record</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Allen Press Journals</source><source>EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals</source><creator>Sinard, John H ; Castellani, William J ; Wilkerson, Myra L ; Henricks, Walter H</creator><creatorcontrib>Sinard, John H ; Castellani, William J ; Wilkerson, Myra L ; Henricks, Walter H</creatorcontrib><description>The increasing availability of laboratory information management modules within enterprise electronic health record solutions has resulted in some institutional administrators deciding which laboratory information system will be used to manage workflow within the laboratory, often with minimal input from the pathologists. This article aims to educate pathologists on many of the issues and implications this change may have on laboratory operations, positioning them to better evaluate and represent the needs of the laboratory during this decision-making process. The experiences of the authors, many of their colleagues, and published observations relevant to this debate are summarized. There are multiple dimensions of the interdependency between the pathology laboratory and its information system that must be factored into the decision. Functionality is important, but management authority and gap-ownership are also significant elements to consider. Thus, the pathologist must maintain an active role in the decision-making process to ensure the success of the laboratory.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0003-9985</identifier><identifier>ISSN: 1543-2165</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1543-2165</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.5858/arpa.2013-0711-SO</identifier><identifier>PMID: 25724027</identifier><identifier>CODEN: APLMAS</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: College of American Pathologists</publisher><subject>Clinical Laboratory Information Systems ; Electronic Health Records ; Humans ; Information management ; Knowledge management ; Medical records ; Middleware ; Pathology, Clinical - methods</subject><ispartof>Archives of pathology &amp; laboratory medicine (1976), 2015-03, Vol.139 (3), p.311-318</ispartof><rights>COPYRIGHT 2015 College of American Pathologists</rights><rights>Copyright College of American Pathologists Mar 2015</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c465t-5e30b32a21571b62df8673b9ee2bdf9a8a754c38769ae845bdc5a27189dbd7d3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c465t-5e30b32a21571b62df8673b9ee2bdf9a8a754c38769ae845bdc5a27189dbd7d3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,27901,27902</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25724027$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Sinard, John H</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Castellani, William J</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wilkerson, Myra L</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Henricks, Walter H</creatorcontrib><title>Stand-alone laboratory information systems versus laboratory modules incorporated in the electronic health record</title><title>Archives of pathology &amp; laboratory medicine (1976)</title><addtitle>Arch Pathol Lab Med</addtitle><description>The increasing availability of laboratory information management modules within enterprise electronic health record solutions has resulted in some institutional administrators deciding which laboratory information system will be used to manage workflow within the laboratory, often with minimal input from the pathologists. This article aims to educate pathologists on many of the issues and implications this change may have on laboratory operations, positioning them to better evaluate and represent the needs of the laboratory during this decision-making process. The experiences of the authors, many of their colleagues, and published observations relevant to this debate are summarized. There are multiple dimensions of the interdependency between the pathology laboratory and its information system that must be factored into the decision. Functionality is important, but management authority and gap-ownership are also significant elements to consider. Thus, the pathologist must maintain an active role in the decision-making process to ensure the success of the laboratory.</description><subject>Clinical Laboratory Information Systems</subject><subject>Electronic Health Records</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Information management</subject><subject>Knowledge management</subject><subject>Medical records</subject><subject>Middleware</subject><subject>Pathology, Clinical - methods</subject><issn>0003-9985</issn><issn>1543-2165</issn><issn>1543-2165</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2015</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><recordid>eNptkl9rFDEUxYModq1-AF9kQJC-ZM2fyWTmsRStQmEftu8hk9zpTslMtklG2G_fxK3aypKHcC-_cwgnB6GPlKxFK9qvOuz1mhHKMZGU4u3mFVpRUXPMaCNeoxUhhOOua8UZehfjfR47xuhbdMaEZDVhcoUetknPFmvnZ6ic7n3QyYdDNc6DD5NOo5-reIgJplj9ghCX-JyavF0cxEwbH_ZlCzYPVdpBBQ5MCn4eTbUD7dKuCpAp-x69GbSL8OHpPke337_dXv3AN5vrn1eXN9jUjUhYACc9Z5pRIWnfMDu0jeR9B8B6O3S61VLUhrey6TS0teitEZpJ2na2t9Lyc3RxtN0H_7BATGoaowHn9Ax-iYo2TU6HSC4y-vk_9N4vYc6PKxTvGJVU_qPutANV8klBm2KqLgUlHZdUFC98grqDGcLvjIcxr1_w6xN8Pham0ZwUfHkmOCYbvVvKT8WXID2CJvgYAwxqH8ZJh4OiRJX6qFIfVeqjSn3UdpM1n56SWPoJ7F_Fn77wR8ESwQU</recordid><startdate>201503</startdate><enddate>201503</enddate><creator>Sinard, John H</creator><creator>Castellani, William J</creator><creator>Wilkerson, Myra L</creator><creator>Henricks, Walter H</creator><general>College of American Pathologists</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>4T-</scope><scope>4U-</scope><scope>7RV</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>88I</scope><scope>8AF</scope><scope>8AO</scope><scope>8C1</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FH</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BBNVY</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>KB0</scope><scope>LK8</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>M2P</scope><scope>M7P</scope><scope>NAPCQ</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>201503</creationdate><title>Stand-alone laboratory information systems versus laboratory modules incorporated in the electronic health record</title><author>Sinard, John H ; Castellani, William J ; Wilkerson, Myra L ; Henricks, Walter H</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c465t-5e30b32a21571b62df8673b9ee2bdf9a8a754c38769ae845bdc5a27189dbd7d3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2015</creationdate><topic>Clinical Laboratory Information Systems</topic><topic>Electronic Health Records</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Information management</topic><topic>Knowledge management</topic><topic>Medical records</topic><topic>Middleware</topic><topic>Pathology, Clinical - methods</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Sinard, John H</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Castellani, William J</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wilkerson, Myra L</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Henricks, Walter H</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Docstoc</collection><collection>University Readers</collection><collection>Proquest Nursing &amp; Allied Health Source</collection><collection>Health &amp; Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Science Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>STEM Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Pharma Collection</collection><collection>Public Health Database</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Health &amp; Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Nursing &amp; Allied Health Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>Health &amp; Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>Science Database</collection><collection>Biological Science Database</collection><collection>Nursing &amp; Allied Health Premium</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Archives of pathology &amp; laboratory medicine (1976)</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Sinard, John H</au><au>Castellani, William J</au><au>Wilkerson, Myra L</au><au>Henricks, Walter H</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Stand-alone laboratory information systems versus laboratory modules incorporated in the electronic health record</atitle><jtitle>Archives of pathology &amp; laboratory medicine (1976)</jtitle><addtitle>Arch Pathol Lab Med</addtitle><date>2015-03</date><risdate>2015</risdate><volume>139</volume><issue>3</issue><spage>311</spage><epage>318</epage><pages>311-318</pages><issn>0003-9985</issn><issn>1543-2165</issn><eissn>1543-2165</eissn><coden>APLMAS</coden><abstract>The increasing availability of laboratory information management modules within enterprise electronic health record solutions has resulted in some institutional administrators deciding which laboratory information system will be used to manage workflow within the laboratory, often with minimal input from the pathologists. This article aims to educate pathologists on many of the issues and implications this change may have on laboratory operations, positioning them to better evaluate and represent the needs of the laboratory during this decision-making process. The experiences of the authors, many of their colleagues, and published observations relevant to this debate are summarized. There are multiple dimensions of the interdependency between the pathology laboratory and its information system that must be factored into the decision. Functionality is important, but management authority and gap-ownership are also significant elements to consider. Thus, the pathologist must maintain an active role in the decision-making process to ensure the success of the laboratory.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>College of American Pathologists</pub><pmid>25724027</pmid><doi>10.5858/arpa.2013-0711-SO</doi><tpages>8</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0003-9985
ispartof Archives of pathology & laboratory medicine (1976), 2015-03, Vol.139 (3), p.311-318
issn 0003-9985
1543-2165
1543-2165
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1660030735
source MEDLINE; Allen Press Journals; EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals
subjects Clinical Laboratory Information Systems
Electronic Health Records
Humans
Information management
Knowledge management
Medical records
Middleware
Pathology, Clinical - methods
title Stand-alone laboratory information systems versus laboratory modules incorporated in the electronic health record
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-01T03%3A00%3A06IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-gale_proqu&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Stand-alone%20laboratory%20information%20systems%20versus%20laboratory%20modules%20incorporated%20in%20the%20electronic%20health%20record&rft.jtitle=Archives%20of%20pathology%20&%20laboratory%20medicine%20(1976)&rft.au=Sinard,%20John%20H&rft.date=2015-03&rft.volume=139&rft.issue=3&rft.spage=311&rft.epage=318&rft.pages=311-318&rft.issn=0003-9985&rft.eissn=1543-2165&rft.coden=APLMAS&rft_id=info:doi/10.5858/arpa.2013-0711-SO&rft_dat=%3Cgale_proqu%3EA510937155%3C/gale_proqu%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1663921717&rft_id=info:pmid/25724027&rft_galeid=A510937155&rfr_iscdi=true