Document Type : Original Article
Authors
1 Lecturer, Medical Records Education, School of ParaMedicine, Hormozgan University of Medical Sciences, Bandar Abbas, Iran (Corresponding Author) Email: nmirabootalebi@hums.ac.ir
2 Associate Professor, Health Information Management, School of Health Management and Information Sciences, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
3 Assistant Professor, Health Care Management, School of Rehabilitation, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
4 Lecturer, Biostatistics, School of Paramedicine, Hormozgan University of Medical Sciences, Bandar Abbas, Iran
5 Medical Records Education, Health Management and Economics Research Center, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran
Abstract
Introduction: Recording the reasons of death especially its underlying causes are considered to be the
most important data in modifying health-care programs of countries. Therefore, a comprehensive
computer system, related databases is necessary in analyzing and understanding the main processes in
health-care. The aim of this study was to evaluate the electronic death registration system in Iran based on
its requirements.
Methods: This was a descriptive-analytical study conducted in 2011 in 12 medical universities of Iran.
The study population consisted of two groups of users and officials of the electronic death registration
system in medical sciences universities of our country (n = 50). The data collection Tools of this study is a
researcher-constructed questionnaire based on the Likert scale, and a checklist. The questionnaire was
based on 3 requirements (user requirements, general requirements, and security requirements). The
checklist was designed to assess technical requirements. The validity of the questionnaire was approved
by the content validity method (opinions of teachers and scholars of health information management and
computer sciences). Its reliability was approved using Cronbach’s alpha. Data analysis was conducted by
SPSS statistical software version 20 and descriptive statistics.
Results: 84.6%, 75.7%, 40.9% of users and experts of medical sciences universities, type 1, respectively
approved the existence of user, general, and security requirements. 34.8%, 66.7%, and 22.7% in type 2,
and 35.7%, 33.3%, and 20.7% in type 3 universities, respectively, approved the existence of user, general,
and security requirements. Moreover, technical requirements are approved by 64.7% of software experts.
According to these results, with a mean of 51.7% in user requirements, 58.5% general requirements, and
64.7% technical requirements the electronic death registration system is at an acceptable level. However,
it is at a weak level in terms of security requirements (28.1%).
Conclusion: Weak results of the security requirements show the inefficiency of this system’s software.
Therefore, the Ministry of Health and Medical Education should plan to improve the performance of this
software in terms of security requirements.
Keywords
2. Nowinski CJ, Becker SM, Reynolds KS, Beaumont JL, Caprini CA, Hahn EA, et al. The impact of converting to
an electronic health record on organizational culture and quality improvement. Int J Med Inform 2007; 76 (Suppl
1): S174-S183.
3. Rampatige R, Mikkelsen L, Gamage S, Peiris S. Promoting the periodic assessment of the quality of medical
records and cause-of-death data: lessons learned from a medical records study in Sri Lanka. University of Health
Information System 2010; 3(7): 29-35.
4. Vapattanawong P, Prasartkul P. Under-registration of deaths in Thailand in 2005-2006: results of cross-matching
data from two sources. Bull World Health Organ 2011; 89(11): 806-12.
5. Mirabootalebi N, Mahboobi HR, Khorgoei T. Electronic Death Registration System (EDRS) in Iran. Electron
Physician 2011; 3(4): HI416-8. [In Persian].
6. Brender J, Ammenwerth E, Nykanen P. Factors Influencing Success and Failure of LHighlight the IS
Development Complexities in Simple, Low Risk Projects in Developing Countries. Proceedings of the 2nd
International Conference on Innovations in Information Technology; 2005 Sep 26-28; Dubai, UAE; 2005.
7. Nauman A, Aziz R, Ishaq M. Information Systems Development Failure: A Case Study to Highlight the IS
Development Complexities in Simple, Low Risk Projects in Developing Countries. Proceedings of the 2nd
International Conference on Innovations in Information Technology; 2005 Sep 26-28; Dubai, UAE; 2005.
8. Markus P. Sustainability Factors for Information Systems in Developing Countries - Academic Registry
Information System in Mozambique. Proceedings of the 5th Prato Community Informatics & Development
Informatics Conference 2008: ICTs for Social Inclusion: What is the Reality? 2008 Oct 27-30; Prato, Italy; 2008.
9. Saitwal H, Feng X, Walji M, Patel V, Zhang J. Assessing performance of an Electronic Health Record (EHR)
using Cognitive Task Analysis. Int J Med Inform 2010; 79(7): 501-6.
10.Maail A. User Participation and the Success of Development of ICT4D project: A Critical Review. Proceedings
of the 4th Annual Workshop. ICT IN GLOBAL DEVELOPMENT. Pre-ICIS Meeting; 2011 Dec 3; Shanghai,
China; 2011.
11. Salmela H, Turunen P. Evaluation of information systems in health care: a framework and its application
[Online]. 2012 [cited 2012 Jan 15]; Available from: URL:
http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1/
12.Yusof MM, Papazafeiropoulou A, Paul RJ, Stergioulas LK. Investigating evaluation frameworks for health
information systems. Int J Med Inform 2008; 77(6): 377-85.
13. Lippeveld T, Sauerborn R, Bodart C. Design & Implementation of Health Information Systems. Sterling, VA:
Stylus Pub Llc; 2000.
14. Farzandipour M, Sadoughi F, Meidani Z. Hospital Information Systems User Needs Analysis: A Vendor Survey.
Journal of Health Informatics in Developing Countries 2011; 5(1): 146-54. [In Persian].
15.Hamborg KC, Vehse B, Bludau HB. Questionnaire Based Usability Evaluation of Hospital Information Systems.
Electronic Journal of Information Systems Evaluation 2004; 7(1): 21-30.
16. Staccini PM, Joubert M, Quaranta JF, Fieschi M. Towards elicitation of users requirements for hospital
information system: from a care process modeling technique to a web based collaborative tool. Proc AMIA Symp
2002; 31(3): 732-6.
17.Amin IM, Hussein SS, Isa WM. Assessing user satisfaction of using hospital information system (HIS) in
Malaysia. International Proceedings of Economic Development and Research 2011; 5(1): 210-3.
18. Ebadi Fardazar F, Ansari H, Marashi SS. Study of users' attitudes about the computerized hospital information
systems (HIS). Payesh 2007; 6(1): 11-8.
19.Ahmadi M, Barabadi M, Kamkar Haghigh M. Evaluation of Hospital Information Systems in the Medical
Records Department. Health Inf Manage 2010; 7(1): 16-23. [In Persian].
20. Farzandipour M, Sadoughi F, Ahmadi M, Karimi I. Safety Requirements for Health Electronic File; Comparison
between Selected Countries. Health Inf Manage 2007; 4(1): 1-9. [In Persian].
21. Zakaria N, Stanton J, Stam K. Exploring security and privacy issues in hospital information system: an
Information Boundary Theory perspective. AMIA Annu Symp Proc 2003; 1059.
22.Gerber C, Ivanova-Vasileva I, Hanisch HM. Formal modelling of IEC 61499 function blocks with integer-valued
data types. Control and cybernetics 2010; 39(1): 197-231.
23.Hubner-Bloder G, Ammenwerth E. Key performance indicators to benchmark hospital information systems - a
delphi study. Methods Inf Med 2009; 48(6): 508-18. 24. Joubert P. Minimum Critical Technical Success Factors for e-development projects: A Maturity Model.
Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Social Implications of Computers in Developing Countries;
2007 May 28-30; São Paulo, Brazil; 2007.
25. Shahmoradi L, Ahmadi M, Rezaei-Hachesoo P. Electronic health record: structure, content, and evaluation.
Tehran, Iran: Jafari Publication; 2008. [In Persian].
26.Chin HL, McClure P. Evaluating a comprehensive outpatient clinical information system: a case study and model
for system evaluation. Proc Annu Symp Comput Appl Med Care 1995; 4210(95): 717-21
)