Anders Klingberg has done some interesting work related to the intention and motivation among emergency care staff to use smartphones for burn injury tele-consultation. He has been looking at burn care in South Africa and in Tanzania where these kinds of injuries are quite common, especially in young children. One of the problems that they have found is the burn diagnosis and initial treatment, and they investigate the use of smart phones for burn injury consultation.
Yesterday Anders Klingberg presented his work at Karolinska Institutet, and I was a part of a committee of three people who discussed his work with him. So far he only has one published paper, but there are more papers to come – so watch out for them 🙂
Now we have kicked off this year’s IT in Society Class. There will be a series of blog post about this course this fall.
Some of the things that make this course very special are:
- Region Uppsala act as a real client to the student project
- We get a topic for the course from the client very year
- It is a global distributed project.
- The students come from Rose-Hulman Institute of Technology and from Uppsala University.
- It is based on a pedagigical concept called Open Ended Group Projects
The IT in Society unit was introduced into the IT engineering degree program as a response to industry feedback collected using questionnaires and meetings prior to commencement of the degree program in 1995. This input emphasized that scaffolding the development of teamwork and communication skills were high priority areas for our industry stakeholders.
Running this course unit has been a challenge every year since 1998, and it has been a quite inspiring challenge. The open-ended group project idea suited this course unit well. But the (for the students, who had experienced a highly technical preparation in most of their other degree course units) unusual content (e.g. societal aspects) added complexity to setting up a productive learning environment. Much effort over the years has been put into devising appropriate scaffolding to support the students, without compromising the underlying ideas behind the open-ended group project concept. There will be more info about this concept later on.
There is a whole series of research publications based on this course. The most prominent one is Mats Daniel’s PhD thesis found here
This summer I helped in organizing a summer school in user centered design and eHealth. The summer school was organized for PhD students and junior researchers in the area, and there were many who applied to the around 35 available positions.
Organizing a summer school was really great fun, and I got to meet a lot of interesting people who do research related to my own eHealth research area. It was also very good to see that the group taking the course became such a well-functioning community of practice during the week, and I am quite sure that they will stay in touch after the summer school has ended. One of the members of the summer school will be visiting my research group for six months as a part of her PhD Education, and for us that will be a great chance to get a new colleague.
My collegue Jonas Mol has written several blog posts about the summer school and all the fantastic lectures. You find his blog posts here:
- Day 1 (Intro, action research,…)
- Day 2 (Patient accessible electronic health records,…)
- Day 3 (Game demoes and workshop,…)
- Day 4 (Soma design, sustainable development,…)
- Day 5 (Project work and lectures)
It’s been a great week in Dublin so far, despite quite cloudy days and occasional rain. The week has been full of good lectures related to the eHealth from different perspectives. The lecture hall in itself was amazing, and during one lunch break we went to visit the old library which was an amazing building (se pictures of this blog)!
There has been many great lectures this week, and I can’t write about them all. Among other things Ann Blandfords presentation of a study made by Hanna Schneider (Msc) of patients different perspcecitves on a system for communicating with health care and the four categories of roles they found in their interveiw material: 1) Controller 2) Collaborator 3) Cooperator 4) Avoider. In this study the self determination theory (Ryan & Deci) was used. I would love to read up some more on that one!
Jonas Moll from the HTO group has written several more detailed blog posts about the lectures and the content. Hop on to his blog and read about these 🙂
In a few weeks the EIT summer school will meet again in Stockholm and Uppsala. Jan Gulliksen and I have worked out a good schedule that will include a visit to the Visualisation studie at KTH and other things. The day in Uppsala will be organised in conjunction with Region Uppsala and the EPJ division, as well as the DOME consortium. There are indeed good and interesting lectures coming up!
The last few weeks I have done lectures related to IT and UCD in different organisations. I will do a blog series about these lectures, and I will also write some words about the different aspects that have been discussed in these seminars. I start out by saying a few words abou the situation with IT projects and the quality of IT systems.
Many investigations conclude that a majority of IT projects fail and do not deliver on time, on budget and with a satisfactory result. According to the Standish group’s definition of success only around 30 % of all IT projects are successful. This means that around 70% of all IT projects deliver too late, with low quality or with unsatisfactory results. These numbers are really horrible!
If one look at the computer systems for work, the problems are obvious and enormous. This is for example reflected in the organisation Unionen’s reports on digital work environment for white collar workers in Sweden. These reports are based on surveys to employees that are members of the union named Unionen. They are named in the following way (translated from Swedish), and I let the titles speak for themselves:
2008: Why does not it get any better ?
2010: A system error ?
2011: Always Connected – Never Relaxed.
2012: One step ahead and two steps back.
2014:- No Lighting in sight.
The IT systems in health care do not work any better, as can be discvovered when reading any newspaper. The headlines in the photo to this blog post show some of the recent ones that I could find, and here you see some of the problems in the headlines:
X-ray Care has Large Problems Due to New IT system
Mapping shows: Non-stable IT support in ambulance care
Windows update reason for enormous breakdown at the hospitals in Uppsala
Stockholm cleans up among health care systems – investing 200 millions
Last week I attended a very well organized day related to implementation of psychosocial support and psychological treatment via the internet organized by the U-care programme. There were lots of experienced researchers from all over the world present at the U-care venue, and presentations of relevant areas were mixed with workshops around implementation of IT in health care. Unfortunately, I had to run off a couple of hours in the middle of the day, but next time this kind of venue is organized I will try to attend the whole day.
I especially enjoyed Anders Brantnells presentation of “Implementation of Complex Interventions – What does research say”. In this presentation, he went through relevant theories related to barriers and enablers when implementing, and we then got to discuss them in relation to implementation of IT in primary care.
Some lessons learned from these discussions about implementation were:
- There are indeed numerous models related to implementation of IT. The ones discussed at the U-care event were very related to health care as such, and perhaps it is necessary to have specific models for different areas of application?
- What kind of knowledge is possible to gain from implemenation research as it is done in many health care projects? What is not possible to learn? According to Wikipedia implemenation research is “Often, research projects focus on small scale pilot studies or laboratory-based experiments, and assume that findings can be generalised to roll out into a practice-based domain with few changes.”
We got more than 60 applications to the eHealth summer school, and I spent two working days going through the different applications. We will accept 36 of the applicants. Reviewing all these applications was of course hard work, but also quite a learning experience. We used a list of criteria when reviewing, and this made it easier and quicker. My collegues in the organising committe are now working in finalizing the results.
There were indeed very interesting research project in the applications. Here are some of my observations from this review process:
- One can conclude that HCI is a very broad area when it comes to health care applications. There is a large variety of areas coverend, and with different perspectives in the reserach approach.
- Many applications were quite loosely connected to health care, and were more of the caracter of pilot studies.
- Some deceases such as diabetes and depression were quite popular.
- There were indeed a high percentage of women researchers (!)! Much higher than in computer science.
– I am so much looking forward to this summer school!
We had a great Dome conference in Skövde about our research on medical records online. There were 12 reserachers present during this conference from a large number of universities. The first day there were some presentations of new and upcoming studies of the effects of patients reading their medical records online.
Erebouni Arakelian who has a PhD in medicine joined a Dome meeting for the first time and presented the plan for a study on the patient group that she is working with, and that she has done studies on before. She will do 30 interviews during the coming years, and has already gotten ethical approval for her study.
Bridget Kane who does reserch in HCI and in Computer Supported Collaborative Work also joined the meeting for the first time and she did a presentation of her previous studies and what she has done in her work. She has covered a very interesting, and large area related to eHealth.
It was interesting to hear about the plans for the upcoming studies, and to discuss what areas we should look more into based on previous findings. Here are some of the upcoming studies:
- Interview study with cancer patients by Ereboni Arakelian as a follow up to the national survey sent out in the fall of 2016 and the interviews made around 2013.
- Interview and survey study with health care professionals at the Oncology department about the effects on the work environment. Jonas Moll it in charge of this study and bloggs about this study here if you want to know more. (this study is a part of the Disa project)
- Interviews with patients in primary care about their use of medical records online (as a part of Maria Hägglund and Isabella Scandurra’s project Pacess)
There were some new members of the consortium present at the conference, and some old members have moved on to other research areas. I am however really glad to see that we have created an open and well functioning community where newcomers are very welcome.
Our summer school on user-centered design of e-Health and m-Health systems is now open for applications.
The school will bring together e-health researchers and innovators from Human-Computer Interaction, Technology, Health Sciences and Psychology. Students receive: grounding in qualitative and quantitative methods that can be used to design and validate e-health systems; practical experience in the refinement of application designs; an introduction to the technology transfer process, which should accompany the translation of research findings into medical practice; and instruction on how this process can operate in e-health.
You find more information here.
It will involve a week in Dublin (TCD) and a week in Stockholm (KTH).
We have a fantastic speaker line up already, and bursaries are available for students to help with travel costs.
Deadline is short so apply now!
See you in Dublin and at KTH!
We have had a very good collaboration with the department of EMR in the Region Uppsala since a few years. We call this collaboration the Dive (Digital work enVIronment and Ehealth) project, and we are a group of 3-4 reserachers who participate. This collaboration has been in the form of an action research project where researchers from our department worked togehter with people from the EMR department in designing a new IT system for surgical planning. We have also collaborated in doing some evaluations of usability aspects that has been used in the deployment of the system. We will also do follow up evaluations of usability. Now we have moved on to looking into decision support systems, and my collegues do vision seminars and will work on a design.
The department of EMR also collaborate with us around the IT in Society class that has resulted in a report, a presentation and also visibiliy at Vitalis 2017.
The Disa project is also supported by the department of EMR, and we collaborate around this project too. This project includes around 10 reserachers who will look into the effects of digitaliczation in health care and the project will result in concepts and a eWorkenvironment framework possible to use when implementing IT in health care. The department of EMR has an excellent and very active representative on the advisory board of the project who has helped us a lot in understanding the organisation.
In these kinds of collaborations it is crucial to find a win-win situation, where both the reserachers and the organisations feels that they get energy and effect from the collaboration. In our case the collaboration in the Dive project has given us much insight in eHealth development and in the complexities of working with IT in health care, which is crucial to be able to work in that area. And I know that the department of EMR are very pleased with the input regarding design that we have given hem. The Disa project has just started, and hopwfully that will result in a win-win too.
We are extremely happy about this colllaboration, and strongly recommend other reserach groups to try the same approach to collaboration!