The description about the My health Record Software used in Australia has been provided in this report. The software is been used in the country so that the health system of the country can be organized and the system would be providing the doctors and the Nurses of the system with the facility to retrieve information from the system and perform diagnosis on the patients accordingly. The details about the stakeholders, the use case and the question that has been used for the analysis of the system has been provided in the report.
The stakeholder analysis is used for the analysis of the stakeholders related to the My health Record system. The stakeholders of a system are judged according to their involvement in the system and also with the possible power towards the organization. The stakeholders of the system can be thus categorized into four categories namely Internal-Operation, Internal-Executive, External-Operation, and External-Executive.
The stakeholder descriptions have been provided in the table below:
|
Stakeholder |
Description |
|
Government |
One of the main stakeholders of the system is the government of Australia. They would be linked directly with the system of the healthcare development and the health of the area would be depending on the implementation of the system. However the government would not be involved with the systems and hence they are categorized as the external executive stakeholders of the information system. |
|
Owners |
The owners of the hospitals also have a huge stake in the implementation of the system. They would not only receive the monetary benefits from the system but also they would be involved with various other decisions from the system. However the stakeholders would not be associated with the systems directly and hence they would considered as the external stakeholders of the system. |
|
Board of directors |
The board of directors would be taking all the major decisions of the system and also would be monitoring and overlooking all the main actions of the system. Hence they are internal executive stakeholders of the system. |
|
Investors |
The investors have a huge stake in the implementation of the system as they are the main stakeholder who would be providing the project team with the funding necessary for the development of the system. However the stakeholders would not be associated with the systems directly and hence they would considered as the external stakeholders of the system. |
|
System administrator |
The system administrator would overlook all the main aspects of the system and they would be the ones who would control the access to the system from the employees and also the administrator would be the one that would be monitoring the system. Hence they are categorized into the Internal Executive stakeholders. |
|
Medical Board |
The medical board would be taking all the important decisions about the medical operation and also update the medicine information for the hospitals individually. They would be linked directly to the systems and hence they can be considered as the internal executive stakeholders of the system. |
|
Doctors |
The association of the doctors with the system is direct and hence the doctors are considered as the external operational stakeholders for the system. The doctors would be fetching information from the system about the patients and would be working directly with the system. Hence the categorization is justified. |
|
The medical staffs of the organization would be able to enter and update data into the system and hence they would be categorized into the external operational stakeholders for the system as they are connected directly to the system. |
|
|
Nurses |
The Nurses would be updating the data of the customers in the system and hence they would be the external operational stakeholders for the system as they are connected directly to the system. |
|
Patients |
The most important stakeholders of the system are the patients as they are one for whom the system is being developed and they are the ones whose data would be uploaded into the system. Hence, they are regarded as the internal operations stakeholders of the system. |
|
IT Staffs |
The IT staffs would be supporting the staffs of the system and they would only be required when there is a system update and the staffs would face difficulty in accessing the systems. However they too have to be categorized as the internal stakeholders of the systems as for the purpose of operations they get connected to the system directly. |
|
System Staffs |
The systems staffs would be used for the implementation of the system. They are the ones who would be developing the system and would also perform the maintenance of the system. The technicians would be categorized as the internal operational stakeholders of the system. |
The questionnaires are directed to the doctors in the system (Missonier & Loufrani-Fedida, 2014). The doctors would be able to provide an excellent insight on how further improvement in the system can be done according to the requirements provided by the doctors.
The following questionnaires would be used:
|
Use case |
Use Case Actors |
|
Staff Registration |
System Administrator |
|
Staff Log in |
Staffs |
|
Staffs |
|
|
Register patient medical story |
Staffs |
|
View patient information |
Doctors |
|
Medical story update |
Doctors |
|
Maintain hospital information |
Staffs |
|
Log in to the medical system |
Patients |
|
Fix appointment |
Patients |
|
Provide treatment |
Patients, Doctors |
|
Make payment |
Staffs, Patients |
|
Use case |
Brief Use Case Description |
|
Staff Registration |
The staffs would be registered to the system by the admin |
|
Staff Log in |
The log in facility for the staffs. |
|
Patient Registration |
The registration of the patients. |
|
Register patient medical story |
The medical information of the patients would be stored into the system. |
|
View patient information |
The doctors would be able to view the information of the patients. |
|
Medical story update |
The doctors would be able to view the medical history of the patients. |
|
Maintain hospital information |
The hospital information would be updated alternatively. |
|
Log in to the medical system |
The log in facility for the patients. |
|
Fix appointment |
The patients would be able to fix appointments. |
|
Provide treatment |
The doctors would be providing treatment to the patients. |
|
Make payment |
The patient would be making the payment through the system. |
|
Scenario: |
Provide Payment |
|
|
Event Trigger: |
The doctor responds to the appointment and provides treatment |
|
|
Brief Description: |
The patients would be provided with treatment on response to the appointment with the doctors. |
|
|
Actors: |
Patients, Doctors |
|
|
Related Use case: |
Fix Appointments |
|
|
Stakeholders: |
System, Staffs |
|
|
Precondition: |
The appointments of the patients should be set with the doctors. |
|
|
Post conditions |
Make Payment. |
|
|
Flow of activities: |
Actor |
System |
|
1. Fix appointment 2. Receive treatment |
1. Confirm appointment 2. The system would confirm that the treatment is provided. |
|
|
Exceptions: |
1. The user doesn’t have a prefixed appointment. |
Azar, A. T., & Vaidyanathan, S. (Eds.). (2015). Chaos modeling and control systems design (Vol. 581). Germany: Springer.
Chang, A. H., Sennett, B. R., Avestruz, A. T., Leeb, S. B., & Kirtley, J. L. (2016). Analysis and design of dc system protection using z-source circuit breaker. IEEE Transactions on Power Electronics, 31(2), 1036-1049.
Chitchyan, R., Rashid, A., Sawyer, P., Garcia, A., Alarcon, M. P., Bakker, J., … & Jackson, A. (2015). Survey of aspect-oriented analysis and design approaches.
Dennis, A., Wixom, B. H., & Tegarden, D. (2015). Systems analysis and design: An object-oriented approach with UML. John wiley & sons.
Kan, T., Nguyen, T. D., White, J. C., Malhan, R. K., & Mi, C. C. (2017). A new integration method for an electric vehicle wireless charging system using LCC compensation topology: analysis and design. IEEE Transactions on Power Electronics, 32(2), 1638-1650.
McCuen, R. H. (2016). Hydrologic analysis and design (Vol. 3). Prentice Hall.
Montgomery, Douglas C. Design and analysis of experiments. John wiley & sons, 2017.
Phillips, C. L., Nagle, H. T., & Chakrabortty, A. (2015). Digital Control System Analysis & Design. Pearson Prentice Hall.
Missonier, S., & Loufrani-Fedida, S. (2014). Stakeholder analysis and engagement in projects: From stakeholder relational perspective to stakeholder relational ontology. International Journal of Project Management, 32(7), 1108-1122.
Delivering a high-quality product at a reasonable price is not enough anymore.
That’s why we have developed 5 beneficial guarantees that will make your experience with our service enjoyable, easy, and safe.
You have to be 100% sure of the quality of your product to give a money-back guarantee. This describes us perfectly. Make sure that this guarantee is totally transparent.
Read moreEach paper is composed from scratch, according to your instructions. It is then checked by our plagiarism-detection software. There is no gap where plagiarism could squeeze in.
Read moreThanks to our free revisions, there is no way for you to be unsatisfied. We will work on your paper until you are completely happy with the result.
Read moreYour email is safe, as we store it according to international data protection rules. Your bank details are secure, as we use only reliable payment systems.
Read moreBy sending us your money, you buy the service we provide. Check out our terms and conditions if you prefer business talks to be laid out in official language.
Read more