Comparing a Japanese and a German hospital information system.

OBJECTIVES: To examine the architectural differences and similarities of a Japanese and German hospital information system (HIS) in a case study. This cross-cultural comparison, which focuses on structural quality characteristics, offers the chance to get new insights into different HIS architectures, which possibly cannot be obtained by inner-country comparisons. METHODS: A reference model for the domain layer of hospital information systems containing the typical enterprise functions of a hospital provides the basis of comparison for the two different hospital information systems. 3LGM(2) models, which describe the two HISs and which are based on that reference model, are used to assess several structural quality criteria. Four of these criteria are introduced in detail. RESULTS: The two examined HISs are different in terms of the four structural quality criteria examined. Whereas the centralized architecture of the hospital information system at Chiba University Hospital causes only few functional redundancies and leads to a low implementation of communication standards, the hospital information system at the University Hospital of Leipzig, having a decentralized architecture, exhibits more functional redundancies and a higher use of communication standards. CONCLUSIONS: Using a model-based comparison, it was possible to detect remarkable differences between the observed hospital information systems of completely different cultural areas. However, the usability of 3LGM(2) models for comparisons has to be improved in order to apply key figures and to assess or benchmark the structural quality of health information systems architectures more thoroughly.

Implementing software development guidelines in a medical informatics research project.

OBJECTIVES: Due to the non-commercial, research-oriented context, software in medical informatics research projects is often developed by researchers as a proof-of-concept without applying structured software development process models. A guideline for software development can bring sufficient structure to the development process while avoiding the complexity of industry-standard methods. METHODS: We adapted the common evidence-based guideline development process from medicine to build a guideline for software development in our medical informatics teaching and research project. RESULTS: Our guideline development used the six steps of problem identification, first proposal, review, revision, gaining consensus and periodic guideline review. Since the developers had taken part in guideline development, our guideline clearly states the consensus of the development team over critical topics. The guideline improved the quality of our source code in structure and understandability. CONCLUSIONS: A software development guideline that is developed following a consensus panel approach is a good instrument for basic software quality assurance in domains where complex, industry-standard software development methods cannot be applied. This is especially the case in non-commercial, research-oriented medical informatics projects where mainly non-software engineers like students do the development work.

In vitro fixator rod loading after transforaminal compared to anterior lumbar interbody fusion.

BACKGROUND: Cages are commonly used to assist lumbar interbody fusion. They are implanted from various approaches. In many cases internal fixators are added to provide sufficient stability. However, how the rods of these fixators are loaded and whether the kind of approach affects these loads is still unknown. The aim of this in vitro study therefore was to determine the loads acting on fixator rods and cages after anterior compared to transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion. METHODS: Six intact human lumbar spine specimens (L1-5) were loaded in a spine tester with pure moments (+/-7.5 N m) in the frontal, sagittal and transverse plane. Loading was repeated, first, after the segments L2-3 and L4-5 were instrumented either with an anterior or a transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion cage "stand alone" and, second, after additional stabilisation with an internal fixator. The rods of the fixator and the four "corners" of the cages were instrumented with strain gauges. FINDINGS: The loads transmitted through the rods were highest in lateral bending. In this loading direction an axial distraction force of in median up to 140 N, an axial compression force of up to 100 N, and a resultant bending moment of up to 1.1 N m were measured in each rod. These loads tended to be lower for the anterior compared to the transforaminal approach. For comparison, the load applied was +/-7.5 N m. The axial strains recorded in the four "corners" of the cages considerably varied from one specimen to the other. Differences in cage strain between the two approaches could not be detected. INTERPRETATION: The loads acting on the rods of the fixator were small compared to the load that was applied. Thus, other structures such as the cages or the facet joints still play an important role in load transfer. The type of approach (anterior or transforaminal) had only little effect on the loading of the rods. This also applies to the local loading of the cages, which probably more depends on the fit between cage and endplates and on the local stiffness properties of the adjacent vertebral bodies.