3
Revista Matronas

Revista Matronas

DICIEMBRE 2015 N° 3 Volumen 3

Use of algorithms and novel obstetrical technologies to assist midwife decisions

Section: Revisions

Authors

María Isabel Fernández Aranda

Position

Matrona del Hospital Virgen del Rocío de Sevilla. Experta Universitaria en Estadística Aplicada a las Ciencias de la Salud, Nutrición en Salud Pública, Seguridad Alimentaria y Educación del Consumidor y Promoción de la Salud en la Comunidad.

Contact email: maribel.fernandez.aranda@gmail.com

Abstract

In recent years, information and communications technology (ICT) and related applications in every healthcare field have quickly developed. Use of novel technologies in healthcare has resulted in availability of improved tools for diagnostic workup in pregnant women and in an increased sensitivity and precision.
A large number of algorithms exist for current healthcare; however, only some of them are frequently used in clinical practice. Algorithms used by midwives in daily practice are a practical and convenient way to make the best scientific evidence available. Nevertheless, most of them have a rather unsatisfactory layout.
The present paper aims at reviewing available data on currently used algorithms in Gynecology-Obstetrics and discussing potential improvements in graphic layout as well as future availability using new ICT devices and channels.

Keywords:

information and communications technology (ICT); midwife; novel technologies; algorithms; decision tools

Versión en Español

Título:

Uso de algoritmos y nuevas tecnologías en obstetricia para la ayuda a la decisión de la matrona

Artículo completo no disponible en este idioma / Full article is not available in this language

Bibliography

  1. Yusta Izquierdo A, Mateos Hernández J, Rodríguez Zapata M. Algoritmos clínicos en Medicina clínica. Hospital Universitario de Guadalajara Facultad de Medicina, Universidad de Alcalá. 2ª ed. Madrid: Editorial Grünenthal; 2009.
  2. Sánchez Sánchez M, Millá Santos J (coords.). Algoritmos de decisión en urgencias de Atención Primaria. Programa de formación. Barcelona: Editorial Profármaco; 2010.
  3. Morilla Herrera JC, Morales Asencio JM. Algoritmos de juicio diagnóstico en respuestas humanas. Biblioteca Lascasas 2005; 1. [acceso 2 nov 2015]. Disponible en: http://www.index-f.com/lascasas/documentos/lc0039.pdf
  4. Marecos E. Los algoritmos. Revista de Posgrado de la VIª Cátedra de Medicina 116/2002; 1-2.
  5. Fisterra.com [sede web]. Barcelona: Elsevier España S.L.U. 2013 [acceso 2 nov 2015]. Disponible en: http://www.fisterra.com/
  6. Veloz Martínez MG, Almanza Velasco E, Augusto Uribe-Ravell J, Libiend Díaz González L, Quintana Romero V, Alanís López P. Uso de tecnologías en información y comunicación por médicos residentes de ginecología y obstetricia. Inv Ed Med 2012; 1(4):183-9.
  7. Kantor G, Svirbely JR, Johnson KA, Sriram MG, Rodríguez J, Smith J. MEDAL: The Medical Algorithm Project. MEDINFO 2001.
  8. Svirbely J, Sriram MG. MEDAL, A compendium of medical algorithms for access over the Internet. Proc AMIA Symp. 1999; 1172 (abstract). [internet]. Disponible en: http://www.informedicajournal.org/a2n3/software_1.htm#_ednref1
  9. Jonhson KA, Svirbely JR, Sriram MG, Smith JW, Cantor G, Rodríguez JR. Automated Medical Algorithms: Issues for Medical Errors. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2002; 9(Nov-Dec suppl):S56–S57.
  10. Suárez Sarmiento EC, Bastanzuri Pagés M, Gundían González-Piñera J, Talledo Ramos L, Almanza Martínez C, González Hernández T. Algoritmos para la vigilancia de la infección hospitalaria en una unidad de cuidados intensivos. Rev Cubana Med Trop 2010; 62(3):180-5.
  11. López-Alegría F, Arcos E, González E, Soares De Lorenzi R, Quezada O. Algoritmos de derivación y confirmación diagnóstica de citología cervical atípica: desafíos para la actualización. Rev Chil Obstet Ginecol 2012; 77(4):322-8.
  12. Cabero LI, Sánchez MA. Protocolos de Medicina Materno-Fetal. Cátedra de Obstetricia y Ginecología. Hospital Universitaria Materno Infantil Valle de Hebrón. 3ª ed. Barcelona: Ergon; 2008.
  13. Carrera JM, Mallafré J, Serra B. Protocolos de Obstetricia y Medicina Perinatal del Instituto Universitaria Dexeus. 4ª ed. Barcelona: Elsevier-Masson; 2006.
  14. SEGO. Protocolos asistenciales en Obstetricia. Recomendaciones sobre la asistencia al parto. Actualizado en 2008. [Internet] Disponible en: www.sego.es
  15. García Mayorga A. Guía práctica de intervenciones enfermeras en urgencias. Madrid: Enfo Ediciones; 2011.
  16. Mukhopadhyay S, Morris E, Arulkumaran S (eds.). Algorithms for Obstetrics and Gynaecology. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2014.
  17. Muñoz Guillén FC, Guardado González MJ. Manual de Urgencias Obstétricas para Matronas. Madrid: Fuden; 2013.
  18. Zapardiel Gutiérrez I, Valero JF, Bajo Arenas JM. Guía práctica de Urgencias en Obstetricia y Ginecología (acorde a los protocolos de la SEGO). Madrid: Editores Habe; 2008.
  19. Cheney H, Dowding DW, Hundley V. Complex interventions in midwifery care: Reflections on the desing and evaluation of an algorithm for the diagnosis of labour. Midwifery 2011; 27:654-9.
  20. Cheyne H, Dowding D, Hundley V. Midwives’ diagnostic judgement and management decisions in making the diagnosis of labour. Journal of Advanced Nursing 2006; 53: 625-35.
  21. Cheyne H, Dowding D, Hundley V, Aucott L, Styles M, Mollison J, et al. The development and testing of an algorithm for diagnosis of active labour in primiparous women. Midwifery 2008; 24:199-213.
  22. Cheyne H, Hundley V, Dowding D, Bland JM, McNamee P, Greer I, et al. The effects of an algorithm for diagnosis of active labour: a cluster randomised trial. British Medical Journal 2008; 337:a2396.
  23. Cheyne H, Terry R, Niven C, Dowding D, Hundley V, McNamee P. ‘Should I come in now?’ A study of women’s early labour experiences. British Journal of Midwifery 2007; 15:604-9.
  24. Garg AX, Adhikari NK, McDonald H, Rosas-Arellano MP, Devereaux PJ, Beyene J, et al. Effects of computerized clinical decision support systems on practitioner performance and patient outcomes. A systematic review. Journal of American Medical Association 2005; 293:1223-38.
  25. Kawamoto K, Houlihan CA, Balas EA, Lobach DF. Improving clinical practice using clinical decision support systems: a systematic review of trials to identify features critical to success. British Medical Journal 2005; 330:765-8.
  26. Payne KB, Wharrad H, Watts K. Smartphone and medical related App use among medical students and junior doctors in the United Kingdom (UK): a regional survey. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak 2012; 12:121.
  27. Lindquist AM, Johansson PE, Petersson GI, Saveman BI, Nilsson GC. The use of the personal digital assistant (PDA) among personnel and students in health care: a review. J Med Internet Res 2008; 10(4):e31.
  28. Prgomet M, Georgiou A, Westbrook JI. The impact of mobile handheld technology on hospital Physicians’ work practices and patient care: a systematic review. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2009; 16(6):792-801.
  29. Wu R, Morra D, Quan S, Lai S, Zanjani S, Abrams H. The Use of smartphones for clinical communication on internal medicine wards. J Hosp Med 2010; 5(9):553-9.
  30. Modi J, Sharma P, Earl A, Simpson M, Mitchell JR, Goyal M. IPhone-based teleradiology for the diagnosis of acite cervico-dorsal spine trauma. Can J Neurol Sci 2010; 37:849-54.
  31. Choudhri AF, Radvany MG. Initial experience with a handheld device digital imaging and comunications in medicine viewer: OsiriX mobile on the iPhone. J Digit Imaging 2011; 24(2):184-9.
  32. Takao H, Murayama Y, Ishibashi T, Karagiozov K, Abe T. A new support system using a mobile device (smartphone) for diagnostic image display and treatment of stroke. Stroke 2011, epub.
  33. Choi B, Mukherjee M, Dala P, Young H, Tracy C, Katz R. Interpretation of remotely downloaded pocket-size cardiac ultrasound images on a webenabled smartphone: validation against workstation evaluation. J Am Soc Echocardiogr 2011; 24(12):1325-30.
  34. Wikipedia.org [sede web]. San Francisco: Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. 2001 [acceso 20 nov 2015]. Disponible en: http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usabilidad
  35. Grindrod KA, Li M, Gates A. Evaluating User Perceptions of Mobile Medication Management Applications With Older Adults: A Usability Study JMIR mHealth uHealth 2014; 2(1):e11. [acceso 2 nov 2015]. Disponible en: http://mhealth.jmir.org/2014/1/e11
  36. Sheehan B, Lee Y, Rodríguez M, Tiase V, Schnall R. A Comparison of Usability Factors of Four Mobile Devices for Accessing Healthcare Information by Adolescents. Appl Clin Inf 2012; 3:356-66.