Clinical Guidelines as Plans

Summary

Objective: Clinical guidelines are special types of plans realized by collective agents. We provide an ontological theory of such plans that is designed to support the construction of a framework in which guideline-based information systems can be employed in the management of workflow in health care organizations.

Method: The framework we propose allows us to represent, in formal terms, how clinical guidelines are realized through the actions of individuals or ganized into teams. We provide various levels of implementation representing different levels of conformity on the part of health care organizations.

Result: Implementations built in conformity with our framework are marked by two dimensions of flexibility that are designed to make them more likely to be accepted by health care professionals than standard guideline-based management systems. They do justice to the fact 1) that responsibilities within a health care organization are widely shared, and 2) that health care professionals may on different occasions be non-compliant with guidelines for a variety of well justified reasons.

Conclusion: The advantage of the framework lies in its built-in flexibility, its sensitivity to clinical context, and its ability to use inference tools based on a robust ontology. One disadvantage lies in its complicated implementation.

Keywords

Clinical workflow - ontology - clinical guidelines - reference partitions - guideline conformance

• References

• 1 Bittner T, Smith B. A Theory of Granular Partitions. In: Foundations of Geographic Information Science. Duckham M, Goodchild MF, Worboys MF. London:: Taylor & Francis;; 2003: 117-51.
• 2 Bittner T, Stell JG. Stratified Rough Sets and Vagueness. COSIT 2003
• 3 Bottazzi E, Catenacci C, Gangemi A, Lehmann J. Collective Intentionality: An Ontological Perspective. In: Castelfranchi C, Tummolini L. International Conference on Collective Intentionality, to appear, 2004, also as LOA report. http://www.loa-cnr.it
• 4 Cartwright J, de Sylva S, Glasgow M, Rivard R, Whiting J. Inaccessible information is useless information: addressing the knowledge gap. J Med Pract Manage 2002; 18 (01) 36-41.
• 5 Clayton PD, Hripcsak G. Decision support in healthcare. Int J of BioMedical Computing 1995; 39: 59-66.
• 6 Gangemi A, Borgo S, Catenacci C, Lehmann J. Task Taxonomies for Knowledge Content, METOKIS Deliverable D07, 2004, available at. http://metokis.salzburgresearch.at http://www.loa-cnr.it
• 7 Gangemi A, Pisanelli DM, Steve G. An Overview of the ONIONS project: Applying Ontologies to the Integration of Medical Terminologies. Data and Knowledge Engineering, 1999; v-31.
• 8 National Library of Medicine, UMLS Knowledge Sources, 2002 edition, available from the NLM, Bethesda, Maryland.
• 9 Masolo C, Borgo S, Gangemi A, Guarino N, Oltramari A. WonderWeb Deliverable D18: The WonderWeb Library of Foundational Ontologies. http://wonderweb.semanticweb.org 2003
• 10 Pisanelli DM, Gangemi A, Steve G. The role of ontologies for an effective and unambiguous dissemination of clinical guidelines. In: Dieng R, Corby O. Knowledge Engineering and Knowledge Management. Springer Verlag: 2000
• 11 Quaglini S, Caffi E, Cavallini A, Micieli G, Stefanelli M. Simulation of a stroke unit careflow. Medinfo 2001; 10 (02) 1190-1.
• 12 Smith B, Rosse C. The Role of Foundational Relations in the Alignment of Biomedical Ontologies http://ontology.buffalo.edu/medo/isa.pdf
• 13 Stefanelli M. The role of methodologies to improve efficiency and effectiveness of care delivery processes for the year 2013. Int J Med Inf 2002; 66 (01) (03) 39-44.
• 14 van der Aalst WMP, Kumar A. Team-Enabled Workflow Management Systems. Data and Knowledge Engineering 2001; 38 (03) 335-63.