The Tribes of Healthcare

Hi fellow Informatics friends,

#whyinformatics... This weekend I worked on a video little video, for a team building meeting, to try to explain the different 'Tribes of Healthcare', the clinical and administrative teams that work together to make patient care happen. 

As we've explored in prior posts, healthcare has a uniquely complex set of stakeholders, each with its own skill set, culture, and terminology. Together, they can make amazing things happen - Real advances in patient care and treatment of disease. Separately, they can struggle. 

It's intended to be a little tongue-in-cheek, but clinical informaticists may find this especially amusing, since informatics sits at the intersection of all of these stakeholders - working to translate their needs and concerns into actionable items, projects, and EMR configurations. If you're struggling to assemble these teams for an operational discussion, make sure to ask your local clinical informatics professional for help. :)

The video has a little introduction from one of my educational side projects, with the sound of a cardiac monitor during a code, so make sure your volume is low if you're using headphones. (Believe it or not, it was all created with some very common phone and laptop tools.)

The result is only about three minutes long, so enjoy!

(Click to open)

Remember - This blog is for educational discussions only - Your mileage may vary. Have any anecdotes you'd care to share? Feel free to leave them in the comments below!

Clinical Linguistics and EMR Interoperability

Hi fellow Informaticists, CMIOs, CNIOs, and other #HealthIT enthusiasts,

For today's post, I wanted to muse on a favorite subject : What can language management teach us about design of clinical documentation and EMR interoperabilty?

To answer this, it's helpful to first understand the three common models of communication used in clinical settings : 

1. Synchronous Communication - Undocumented, real-time communication, where both sender and recipient are sharing the same moment in time - E.g. face-to-face conversations, telephone conversations, video chats, or meetings
2. Asynchronous Communication - Documented communication, where both sender and recipient are separated in time - E.g. EMRs, HIEs, Notes, charts, graphs, videos, recordings, videos, voicemails
3. Hybrid Communication - Shares features of both, e.g. Texting, social media, Twitter, recorded phone calls, etc.

Professional interpreters and translators (like you might find at the U.N.) have worked for years to manage communications across these models - What can healthcare learn from them?

To help answer these questions, I've developed the following 14-minute-3-second video, for your consideration : 

I hope you enjoyed it - Leave your thoughts or feedback in the comments section below!

Linguistic issues in Healthcare

I'll admit it - I was flattered when Mark Hagland of Healthcare Informatics recently gave me my second interview about CMIO life. During our discussion, he asked me a lot of questions about "What does it mean to be a CMIO?" and "What makes a good CMIO?". And as I was responding, I told him that I feel like a lot of my job is about offering translational services between the clinical side, the administrative side, and the IT side of healthcare.

As a multilingual person who grew up in a multicultural household, I learned a lot about interpreting :

• How culture, context, and language all interplay and influence each other.
• How hard it is to pin down which of the three is more influential in communicating a message.
• How language is sometimes unable to convey a specific message. (* - IMHO, this is why art, poetry, and music exist - To help send those messages where language fails.)

So I feel like a lot of my the CMIO role is like being a United Nations Interpreter - I have to consider the culture, context, and language that each member of a team is using, and try to make sure that the "same message" is being received at the other end of the line.

I can only say that quietly, I see a lot of confusion happening in the national healthcare discussion because we don't appreciate the linguistic issues which contribute to that confusion. We don't see it because we're all speaking English... right?

To give an example of what I'm talking about, I sometimes act as an interpreter between the German and American members of my family. This is a fairly straightforward act, where :

• At dinner, one of my German family members will say something in German.
• I listen to what they said, and have to consider both the context of the message, and the German cultural perspective of what they said
• I have to mentally prepare a translation with a similar theme in English with an American perspective.
• I have to help verify the context and quality of my mental translation by comparing it with a similar American cultural context (if one exists). 
• Sometimes, despite your best efforts, there is no way to do this 100% effectively - This is why there are words that 'cannot really be translated', like "Kindergarten" and "schadenfreude" which make their way into the English/American lexicon.
• I deliver the best English translation I can that, hopefully, is as close to the content, context, and spirit of the original message.

This process of translation is fairly intuitive to most people when speaking different languages because, well, they are different languages - There is virtually no way my American family and German family can talk to each other without an interpreter.

The problem in many healthcare discussions is that we're all speaking English - So the context and cultural perspectives of different members of the healthcare workforce are not as apparent, and so it's not as immediately clear that you've crossed cultural boundaries. In short - It's very easy for messages to get mixed up because people aren't always aware when they have crossed a cultural boundary. People may have experienced this in any business, but healthcare is particularly susceptible to this due to the many cultures that interplay in healthcare - Clinical, administrative, technical, business, etc.

As a CMIO who grew up multilingual, however, I'm keenly watching for those cultural boundaries, and playing so many roles, I try to act as an interpreter and watch to make sure the right message was received on both sides of the fence.

Still, even with my experience, I was recently humbled when I inadvertently crossed a culture boundary  - I tried to let a family member know I moved their mother to the ICU just as a precaution :

Me : "I moved your mother from the floor to the ICU just as a precaution."

Family : "What was my mother doing on the floor? Did she trip and fall?" 

(Same word, different culture and context - Good thing this person asked for clarification! What if the family hadn't asked for clarification?)

An interesting parallel to this discussion - UN interpreters are generally expected to study both of their languages equally well and to live in both cultures, so they understand the cultural context, jargon, slang, and idiomatic expressions in both languages. In the same way, I think that's why it's helpful for me to work both clinically and administratively - It helps me understand the language, jargon, slang, and idiomatic expressions of both cultures.

So Mark, as a multicultural, multinational, and multilingual guy himself, totally understood this issue and wrote this really interesting blog post where he spoke about an experience he had while visiting South Korea, when he participated in a 'translational daisy chain' where a diverse group of visitors were trying to help a French-speaking Belgian woman buy tickets. Using a combination of people, all bilingual but speaking different languages, they established a French <> English <> German <> Korean translation chain, and by each person working on their part of the translation, this French-speaking woman was able to buy tickets from a Korean-speaking vendor.

It's one of the craziest stories I've ever heard, but it beautifully demonstrates both the value of bilingualism and the work it takes to get even a simple message across four languages and four cultures. Anyone who has played the game "Telephone" just using English knows how easy it is to fail to relay a message - Imagine doing it across four languages and cultures!

I suppose this might be one of the reasons I see a lot of CMIOs from diverse backgrounds, where something about their life experience taught them to be comfortable crossing cultural boundaries and 'seeing both sides of the coin'. This seems to be a fairly common trait among the other CMIOs I meet. For me, it's part of the reason why I so enjoy helping to further define and clarify the CMIO role - to help healthcare evolve and adapt.

Remember, this is just academic banter, and your mileage may vary. Always enjoy comments, questions, thoughts, and discussion!

Converting paper order sets to electronic

If you're reading this, I hope you're the person in your institution trying to "convert the paper order sets to electronic ones".

Don't worry - you're perfectly normal. The job is usually a lot harder than it looks. And no, you're not the only one who hears, "Why can't you just take the paper order sets and put them on the screen?"

(Most people think it's simple, until they actually start to dissect the order sets.)

First, let's start with some of the challenges of paper order sets :

1. Paper order sets generally keep multiplying - Let's say you decide to fix the paper order sets, and so you need to take the old versions "off the shelves". Beware - People tend to make copies of paper order sets. So the old ones can turn up weeks and months later.
2. Paper order sets are often engineered differently - In the electronic (CPOE) world, orders are very concrete. You may have specific safety features put into your electronic PCA (Patient-Controlled Anesthesia) order. How will you put those safety features into your paper order set? You may also have hidden "protocols" in your paper order sets. What will you do with those protocol (conditional) orders? 
3. Paper order sets are sometimes ignored, after a hospital "goes electronic" - If you ignore your paper order sets, what will your hospital use during electronic downtimes? Can you afford not to have paper backup order sets, if your OR/ED are busy?

Believe it or not, how you address these paper-order-set problems will be vitally important in your long-term electronic success. Ignore the paper order sets, and you will miss an opportunity to really set up a robust electronic platform.

Let's look at each of these issues in a little more detail :

1. The "Multiplying paper order sets" -

This is a phenomenon many organizations struggle with. The solution : Centralize all of your order sets on one common electronic web site, and publish them as non-editable .PDF files. Create a clinical policy where "If it's not on this site, it's not an acceptable order set".  It will take you a while to get the site together, and organize all of your paper order sets there, but in the end, you will have a way of controlling the paper order sets in use. 

2. The "Engineering differences" between paper and electronic order sets

Some organizations, on going electronic, focus on developing electronic order sets, while the paper order sets continue to be produced in the way they "always have been built". If you have two separate processes (an electronic and a paper process), the problem is that you will start to have significant engineering differences between the two. 

If you have different paper and electronic order sets, you will then encounter :

• Paper order sets that don't meet the engineering standards needed for order entry in your EMR, so they will be very hard to "send-to-pharmacy-so-someone-else-can-do-the-order-entry"...
• Paper order sets that don't match the electronic order sets
• Two cultures : Docs who use electronic order sets, and docs who use paper order sets. (If your organization does a "flip-the-switch" approach to EMR/CPOE, then this won't apply to you. If you do a "gradual conversion", then this will apply to you.)

The way you fix this, of course, is to develop simultaneous paper and electronic order sets. Set up your informatics platform, update your policy on order set development (to include paper and electronic order sets), and ask your informaticists to develop the paper and electronic order sets simultaneously. Have them tested by the same people, and approved by the same committee. This will ensure that they match, and even if you are a "100% CPOE" organization, you will still appreciate having matching paper order sets during electronic downtimes.

Remember, the solution isn't to make electronic orders that mirror your bad paper processes. Make good, solid, and safe electronic orders, and then use those in your updated paper order sets.

A final tip : Embedded "protocol" (conditional) orders generally need to get pulled out of the paper order sets, before you can "make them electronic" - and you will need to decide what to do with those : A. publish them as new protocols, or B. throw them out. This will take work and can be politically challenging. 

3. The "Ignored Paper Order Sets"

Some organizations, on going electronic, ignore the paper order sets, thinking, "We don't need them anymore, right?". My advice : Don't ignore them. Not only will you need to figure out what your pharmacy will do if they end up getting faxed paper orders, but you will still need them for computer downtimes.

If all of this sounds complicated, and it sounds like a lot of work, you're right - It is. This is why order sets are the political and organizational challenge that they are. A good informaticist can help sort out the issues and put a plan and process into place for your organization, where it doesn't have to be too painful. Unfortunately, because healthcare doesn't have standards in clinical processes, every organization handles this conversion differently, and as a result, order sets are notoriously hard to standardize. (Think of them as a "custom-fitted suit".)

One last tip : Beware the "quick fix" - There are consultants who will "easily and quickly convert your paper order sets to electronic ones". The way they usually do this is by taking the paper orders, no matter how they are engineered, and simply build new electronic orders that match them. In the short term, this may appear to work, but in the long term, it may leave the nurses with orders which are unclear (and may create extra pages to doctors to clarify), since some paper orders are not as well-defined as their electronic counterparts. You may also miss out on the opportunity to streamline your clinical processes, and miss out on the time and cost savings that an EMR can really bring. My recommendation : Build the new paper order sets to match the engineering standards of your electronic order sets - Not the other way around. 

As always, my advice with order sets : There are no quick fixes. Hire a good informaticist to help you with this. :)

Hey, by the way, I'm open for questions - If anyone has any EMR conversion or informatics questions that you'd like to chat about, feel free to leave a comment here or email me. I'll try to devote my next posts to reader questions! So send me stories, questions, or whatever else you'd like to discuss in upcoming posts - I look forward to hearing from folks! :)