Blum J B, Kramer J M, Johnson K B
The Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.
Proc AMIA Symp. 2001:52-6.
Handheld wireless technologies offer great promise in helping to improve healthcare. However, it is not clear whether off-the-shelf wireless networking will work as well within medical centers as this technology works outside of the medical center. Therefore, we evaluated the coverage of wide-area wireless technology within two representative academic medical centers. The study determined the rate of connectivity by testing both the Palm VII and the Minstrel V modem in a set of locations typically frequented by house staff in their daily activities. Within one hospital, connectivity was 59% for OmniSky service, and 78% for Palm.net. The second hospital's connectivity was over 93% with both devices. Differences in connectivity were likely due to the number of rooms visited with externally exposed walls, the suburban versus urban location of the academic medical center, and the relative location of service transponders. When examined by the Johns Hopkins Clinical Devices Laboratory, both devices were found to operate without interfering with other hospital equipment.
手持式无线技术在帮助改善医疗保健方面前景广阔。然而，现成的无线网络在医疗中心的运行效果是否能与该技术在医疗中心外的运行效果一样好尚不清楚。因此，我们评估了广域无线技术在两家具有代表性的学术医疗中心内的覆盖范围。该研究通过在住院医生日常活动中经常光顾的一组地点测试Palm VII和Minstrel V调制解调器来确定连接率。在一家医院内，OmniSky服务的连接率为59%，Palm.net的连接率为78%。第二家医院使用这两种设备的连接率均超过93%。连接率的差异可能是由于参观的有外露墙壁的房间数量、学术医疗中心的郊区与城市位置以及服务转发器的相对位置。经约翰霍普金斯临床设备实验室检测，发现这两种设备在运行时均不会干扰其他医院设备。
