skip to main content
10.1145/1718918.1718977acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagescscwConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Why the plan doesn't hold: a study of situated planning, articulation and coordination work in a surgical ward

Published:06 February 2010Publication History

ABSTRACT

Most studies of plans and situated work have applied ethnographic methods and and thus fail to provide any quantitative insight into the extent of this phenomenon. We present a study of planning and executing operations in an operating suite. Quantitative analysis of log data reveals the extent to which operation schedules are carried out as planned, and qualitative studies reveal the reasons behind changes to the plan, the consequences of such changes, and the strategies used to cope with them. 67% of the plan is changed and only 56% of all operations are planned ahead. We discuss how operation schedules are subject to "continuous planning", and how this needs to be supported by technology.

References

  1. J. E. Bardram. Plans as Situated Action: An Activity Theory Approach to Workflow Systems. In Proceedings of the Fifth European Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work, pages 17--32. Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1997. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. J. E. Bardram. Designing for the Dynamics of CooperativeWork Activities. In Proceedings of the 1998 ACM conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work, pages 89--98. ACM Press, 1998. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. J. E. Bardram. Temporal coordination -- on time and coordination of collaborative activities at a surgical department. Computer Supported Cooperative Work. An International Journal, 9(2):157--187, 2000. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. J. E. Bardram and C. Bossen. MobilityWork -- The Spatial Dimension of Collaboration at a Hospital. Computer Supported Cooperative Work., 14(2):131--160, 2005. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. J. E. Bardram, T. R. Hansen, and M. Soegaard. Awaremedia: a shared interactive display supporting social, temporal, and spatial awareness in surgery. In CSCW '06: Proceedings of the 2006 conference on Computer supported cooperative work, pages 109--118, New York, NY, USA, 2006. ACM. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. J. Bowers, G. Button, and W. Sharrock.Workflow from within and without: Technology and cooperative work on the print industry shopfloor. In Proceedings of the Fourth European Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work, pages 51--66. Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1995. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. F. Dexter and R. D. Traub. How to schedule elective surgical cases into specific operating rooms to maximize the efficiency of use of operating room time. Anesth Analg, 94:933--942, 2002.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  8. C. McIntosh, F. Dexter, and R. H. Epstein. Impact of service-specific staffing, case scheduling, turnovers, and first-case starts on anesthesia group and operating room productivity. Anesthesia & Analgesia, 103:1499--1516, 2006.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  9. G. Munkvold, G. Ellingsen, and E. Monteiro. From plans to planning: the case of nursing plans. In GROUP'07: Proceedings of the 2007 international ACM conference on Supporting group work, pages 21--30, New York, NY, USA, 2007. ACM. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. C. L. Plasters, F. J. Seagull, and Y. Xiao. Coordination challenges in operating-room management: An in-depth field study. In AMIA Annu Symp Proc., pages 524--528, 2003.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. W. Prinz, M. Jarke, Y. Rogers, K. Schmidt, and V. Wulf, editors. Proceedings of the Seventh European Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work. Kluwer Academic Publishers, 2001. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. M. Reddy and P. Dourish. A finger on the pulse: Temporal rythms and information seeking in medical work. In Proceedings of the 2002 ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work, pages 344--353. ACM Press, 2002. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. M. Reddy, P. Dourish, and W. Pratt. Coordinating heterogeneous work: Information and representation in medical care. In Prinz et al. {11}, pages 239--258. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. K. Rönkkö, Y. Dittrich, and D. Randall. When plans do not work out: How plans are used in software development projects. Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW), 14(5):433--468, 10 2005/10/11/. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. K. Schmidt and C. Simonee. Coordination mechanisms: Towards a conceptual foundation of cscw systems design. Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW), 5(2):155--200, 06 1996/06/01/. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. L. Suchman. Plans and Situated Actions. The Problem of Human-Machine Communication. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1987. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. Y. Xiao, C. Lasome, J. Moss, C. Mackenzie, and S. Faraj. Cognitive properties of a whiteboard: A case study in a trauma centre. In Prinz et al. {11}, pages 259--278. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. Why the plan doesn't hold: a study of situated planning, articulation and coordination work in a surgical ward

        Recommendations

        Comments

        Login options

        Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

        Sign in
        • Published in

          cover image ACM Conferences
          CSCW '10: Proceedings of the 2010 ACM conference on Computer supported cooperative work
          February 2010
          468 pages
          ISBN:9781605587950
          DOI:10.1145/1718918

          Copyright © 2010 ACM

          Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

          Publisher

          Association for Computing Machinery

          New York, NY, United States

          Publication History

          • Published: 6 February 2010

          Permissions

          Request permissions about this article.

          Request Permissions

          Check for updates

          Qualifiers

          • research-article

          Acceptance Rates

          Overall Acceptance Rate2,235of8,521submissions,26%

          Upcoming Conference

          CSCW '24

        PDF Format

        View or Download as a PDF file.

        PDF

        eReader

        View online with eReader.

        eReader