nach oben

Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW)

Erschienen in:

01.04.2011

Artefactual Multiplicity: A Study of Emergency-Department Whiteboards

verfasst von: Pernille Bjørn, Morten Hertzum

Erschienen in: Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW) | Ausgabe 1-2/2011

Einloggen

Aktivieren Sie unsere intelligente Suche, um passende Fachinhalte oder Patente zu finden.

search-config

KI-gestützte Suche

Aus

Abstract

Whiteboards are highly important to the work in emergency departments (EDs). As a collaborative technology ED whiteboards are usually placed in the dynamic centre of the ED, and all ED staff will approach the whiteboard regularly to organize their individual yet interdependent work. Currently, digital whiteboards are replacing the ordinary dry-erase whiteboards in EDs, which bring the design and use of whiteboards in ED to our attention. Previous studies have applied the theoretical lenses of common information spaces, coordination, and awareness to the investigation of whiteboard use and design. Based on an ethnographic study of the work practices involving two differently designed ED whiteboards, we found these concepts insufficient to explain one essential characteristic of these heterogeneous artefacts. In this paper, we suggest an additional theoretical concept describing this characteristic of heterogeneous artefacts; namely artefactual multiplicity. Artefactual multiplicity identifies not only the multiple functions of heterogeneous artefacts but also the intricate relations between these multiple functionalities.

Vorheriger Artikel Tertiary-Level Telehealth: A Media Space Application

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 102.000 Bücher
über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 390 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

CTAS: Canadian Triage and Acuity Scale

In the Canadian Pediatric ED they use the term ‘consultant’ to indicate whether a patient needs to be seen by a medical specialist. If the attending physician requests that a consultant from, say, the orthopedic department must see the patient, the charge nurse will call the orthopedic department. At this time the charge nurse does not know which orthopedic consultant will arrive and, therefore, writes the requested service ‘ortho’, instead of the name of the consultant, on the whiteboard. When they know the name, they will write, e.g., ‘Smith’. This way, the label ‘consultant’ may seem confusing, because the content of the column is more of a service even though the label ‘consultant’ refers to a role.

Aronsky, D., Jones, I., Lanaghan, K., & Slovis, C. M. (2008). Supporting patient care in the emergency department with a computerized whiteboard system. Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association, 15(2), 184–194.CrossRef

Balka, E., Bjørn, P., & Wagner, I. (2008). Steps towards a typology for health informatics. In Proceedings of the CSCW 2008 conference on computer supported cooperative work (pp. 515–524). New York: ACM Press.

Bannon, L., & Bødker, S. (1997). Constructing common information spaces. In J. A. Hughes, W. Prinz, T. Rodden, & K. Schmidt (Eds.), ECSCW1997: Proceedings of the fifth European conference on computer supported cooperative work (pp. 81–96). Amsterdam: Kluwer.

Barbot, J., & Dodier, N. (2002). Multiplicity in scientific medicine: the experience of HIV-positive patients. Science, Technology, & Human Values, 27(3), 404–440.

Bardram, J. (2000). Temporal coordination—on time and coordination of collaborative activities at a surgical department. Computer Supported Cooperative Work, 9(2), 157–187.CrossRef

Bardram, J., & Bossen, C. (2005a). Mobility work: the spatial dimension of collaboration at a hospital. Computer Supported Cooperative Work, 14(2), 131–160.CrossRef

Bardram, J., & Bossen, C. (2005b). A web of coordinative artefacts: Collaborative work in a hospital ward. In Proceedings of the GROUP 2005 conference on supporting group work (pp. 168–176). New York: ACM Press.

Bardram, J., Hansen, T., & Soegaard, M. (2006). AwareMedia: A shared interactive display supporting social, temporal, and spatial awareness in surgery. In Proceedings of the CSCW'06 conference on computer supported cooperative work (pp. 109–118). New York: ACM Press.

Berg, M., & Akrich, M. (2004). Introduction—bodies on trial: performances and politics in medicine and biology. Body & Society, 10(2&3), 1–12.CrossRef

Berg, M., & Mol, A. (1998). Differences in medicine: Unraveling practices, techniques, and bodies. London: Duke University Press.

Bjørn, P., & Rødje, K. (2008). Triage drift: a workplace study in a pediatric emergency department. Computer Supported Cooperative Work, 17(4), 395–419.CrossRef

Bjørn, P., Burgoyne, S., Crompton, V., MacDonald, T., Pickering, B., & Munro, S. (2009). Boundary factors and contextual contingencies: configuring electronic templates for health care professionals. European Journal of Information Systems, 18(5), 428–441.CrossRef

Bossen, C. (2002). The parameters of common information spaces: The heterogeneity of cooperative work at a hospital ward. In Proceedings of the CSCW2002 conference on computer supported cooperative work (pp. 176–185). New York: ACM Press.

Burns, C. M. (2000). Navigation strategies with ecological displays. International Journal of Human Computer Studies, 52(1), 111–129.CrossRef

Chaboyer, W., Wallen, K., Wallis, M., & McMurray, A. M. (2009). Whiteboards: one tool to improve patient flow. The Medical Journal of Australia, 190(11), S137–S140.

Egger, E., & Wagner, I. (1993). Negotiating temporal orders: the case of collaborative time management in a surgery clinic. Computer Supported Cooperative Work, 1(4), 255–275.CrossRef

Endsley, M. R. (2006). Situation awareness. In G. Salvendy (Ed.), Handbook of human factors and ergonomics (3rd ed., pp. 528–542). New York: Wiley.CrossRef

Forsythe, D. (1999). It’s just a matter of common sense: ethnography as invisible work. Computer Supported Cooperative Work, 8(1&2), 127–145.CrossRef

France, D. J., Levin, S., Hemphill, R., Chen, K., Rickard, D., Makowski, R., et al. (2005). Emergency physicians’ behaviour and workload in the presence of an electronic whiteboard. International Journal of Medical Informatics, 74(10), 827–837.CrossRef

Gasser, L. (1986). The integration of computing and routine work. ACM Transactions on Office Information Systems, 4(3), 205–225.CrossRef

Grudin, J., & Grinter, R. (1995). Ethnography and design. Computer Supported Cooperative Work, 3(1), 55–59.CrossRef

Heath, C., & Luff, P. (1992). Collaboration and control: crisis management and multimedia technology in London underground line control rooms. Computer Supported Cooperative Work, 1(1&2), 69–94.CrossRef

Heath, C., Svensson, M. S., Hindmarsh, J., Luff, P., & vom Lehn, D. (2002). Configuring awareness. Computer Supported Cooperative Work, 11(3&4), 317–347.CrossRef

Hertzum, M., & Simonsen, J. (2008). Positive effects of electronic patient records on three clinical activities. International Journal of Medical Informatics, 77(12), 809–817.CrossRef

Hine, C. (2007). Multi-sited ethnography as a middle range methodology for contemporary STS. Science, Technology, & Human Values, 32(6), 652–671.CrossRef

Law, J. (2004). After method: Mess is social science research. London: Routledge.

Lundberg, N., & Hellioglu, H. (1999). Understanding complex coordination processes in health care. Scandinavian Journal of Information Systems, 11, 157–182.

Mark, G. (2002). Conventions and commitments in distributed CSCW groups. Computer Supported Cooperative Work, 11(3&4), 349–387.CrossRef

Mol, A. (2002). The body multiple: Ontology in medical practice. London: Duke University Press.

Riley, R., Forsyth, R., Manias, E., & Iedema, R. (2007). Whiteboards: mediating professional tensions in clinical practice. Communication & Medicine, 4(2), 165–175.CrossRef

Schmidt, K. (2002). The problem with ‘awareness’. Computer Supported Cooperative Work, 11(3&4), 285–298.CrossRef

Schmidt, K., & Bannon, L. (1992). Taking CSCW seriously: supporting articulation work. Computer Supported Cooperative Work, 1(1&2), 7–40.CrossRef

Schmidt, K., & Simone, C. (1996). Coordination mechanisms: towards a conceptual foundation of CSCW system design. Computer Supported Cooperative Work, 5(2&3), 155–200.CrossRef

Scupelli, P., Xiao, Y., Fussell, S. R., Kiesler, S., & Gross, M. D. (2010). Supporting coordination in surgical suites: Physical aspects of common information spaces. In Proceedings of the CHI 2010 conference on human factors in computing systems (pp. 1777–1786). New York: ACM Press.

Strauss, A., Fagerhaugh, S., Suczek, B., & Wiener, C. (1985). Social organization of medical work. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Suchman, L. (1995). Making work visible. Communications of the ACM, 38(9), 56–64.CrossRef

Tang, A., Lanir, J., Greenberg, S., & Fels, S. (2009). Supporting transitions in work: Informing large display application design by understanding whiteboard use. In Proceedings of the GROUP'09 conference on supporting group work (pp. 149–158). New York: ACM Press.

Whittaker, S., & Schwarz, H. (1999). Meetings of the board: the impact of scheduling medium on long term group coordination in software development. Computer Supported Cooperative Work, 8(3), 175–205.CrossRef

Wilkie, A., & Michael, M. (2009). Expectation and mobilisation: enacting future users. Science, Technology, & Human Values, 34(4), 502–522.CrossRef

Wong, H. J., Caesar, M., Bandali, S., Agnew, J., & Abrams, H. (2009). Electronic inpatient whiteboards: improving multidisciplinary communication and coordination of care. International Journal of Medical Informatics, 78(4), 239–247.CrossRef

Xiao, Y., Lasome, C., Moss, J., Mackenzie, C., & Faraj, S. (2001). Cognitive properties of a whiteboard: A case study in a trauma centre. In ECSCW 2001: Proceedings of the seventh European conference on computer supported cooperative work (pp. 259–278). Amsterdam: Kluwer.

Titel: Artefactual Multiplicity: A Study of Emergency-Department Whiteboards
verfasst von: Pernille Bjørn
Morten Hertzum
Publikationsdatum: 01.04.2011
Verlag: Springer Netherlands
Erschienen in: Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW) / Ausgabe 1-2/2011
Print ISSN: 0925-9724
Elektronische ISSN: 1573-7551
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10606-010-9126-7

Springer Professional

Abstract

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu Ihrer Lizenz zu erhalten.

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Springer Professional "Technik"

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"