» Articles » PMID: 16597341

Evaluation of PROforma As a Language for Implementing Medical Guidelines in a Practical Context

Overview
Publisher Biomed Central
Date 2006 Apr 7
PMID 16597341
Citations 5
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background: PROforma is one of several languages that allow clinical guidelines to be expressed in a computer-interpretable manner. How these languages should be compared, and what requirements they should meet, are questions that are being actively addressed by a community of interested researchers.

Methods: We have developed a system to allow hypertensive patients to be monitored and assessed without visiting their GPs (except in the most urgent cases). Blood pressure measurements are performed at the patients' pharmacies and a web-based system, created using PROforma, makes recommendations for continued monitoring, and/or changes in medication. The recommendations and measurements are transmitted electronically to a practitioner with authority to issue and change prescriptions. We evaluated the use of PROforma during the knowledge acquisition, analysis, design and implementation of this system. The analysis focuses on the logical adequacy, heuristic power, notational convenience, and explanation support provided by the PROforma language.

Results: PROforma proved adequate as a language for the implementation of the clinical reasoning required by this project. However a lack of notational convenience led us to use UML activity diagrams, rather than PROforma process descriptions, to create the models that were used during the knowledge acquisition and analysis phases of the project. These UML diagrams were translated into PROforma during the implementation of the project.

Conclusion: The experience accumulated during this study highlighted the importance of structure preserving design, that is to say that the models used in the design and implementation of a knowledge-based system should be structurally similar to those created during knowledge acquisition and analysis. Ideally the same language should be used for all of these models. This means that great importance has to be attached to the notational convenience of these languages, by which we mean the ease with which they can be read, written, and understood by human beings. The importance of notational convenience arises from the fact that a language used during knowledge acquisition and analysis must be intelligible to the potential users of a system, and to the domain experts who provide the knowledge that will be used in its construction.

Citing Articles

The use of computer-interpretable clinical guidelines to manage care complexities of patients with multimorbid conditions: A review.

Bilici E, Despotou G, Arvanitis T Digit Health. 2018; 4:2055207618804927.

PMID: 30302270 PMC: 6172935. DOI: 10.1177/2055207618804927.


Telemonitoring: use in the management of hypertension.

Sivakumaran D, Earle K Vasc Health Risk Manag. 2014; 10:217-24.

PMID: 24748801 PMC: 3986416. DOI: 10.2147/VHRM.S36749.


Requirements for guidelines systems: implementation challenges and lessons from existing software-engineering efforts.

Shah H, Allard R, Enberg R, Krishnan G, Williams P, Nadkarni P BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2012; 12:16.

PMID: 22405400 PMC: 3342141. DOI: 10.1186/1472-6947-12-16.


Towards computerizing intensive care sedation guidelines: design of a rule-based architecture for automated execution of clinical guidelines.

Ongenae F, De Backere F, Steurbaut K, Colpaert K, Kerckhove W, Decruyenaere J BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2010; 10:3.

PMID: 20082700 PMC: 2823596. DOI: 10.1186/1472-6947-10-3.


Using health information technology to improve hypertension management.

Goldstein M Curr Hypertens Rep. 2008; 10(3):201-7.

PMID: 18765090 DOI: 10.1007/s11906-008-0038-6.

References
1.
Earle K, Taylor P, Wyatt S, Burnett S, Ray J . A physician-pharmacist model for the surveillance of blood pressure in the community: a feasibility study. J Hum Hypertens. 2001; 15(8):529-33. DOI: 10.1038/sj.jhh.1001220. View

2.
Williams B, Poulter N, Brown M, Davis M, McInnes G, Potter J . Guidelines for management of hypertension: report of the fourth working party of the British Hypertension Society, 2004-BHS IV. J Hum Hypertens. 2004; 18(3):139-85. DOI: 10.1038/sj.jhh.1001683. View

3.
Hripcsak G . Writing Arden Syntax Medical Logic Modules. Comput Biol Med. 1994; 24(5):331-63. DOI: 10.1016/0010-4825(94)90002-7. View

4.
Peleg M, Boxwala A, Ogunyemi O, Zeng Q, Tu S, Lacson R . GLIF3: the evolution of a guideline representation format. Proc AMIA Symp. 2000; :645-9. PMC: 2243832. View

5.
Rood E, Bosman R, van der Spoel J, Taylor P, Zandstra D . Use of a computerized guideline for glucose regulation in the intensive care unit improved both guideline adherence and glucose regulation. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2004; 12(2):172-80. PMC: 551549. DOI: 10.1197/jamia.M1598. View