risk management through information technology support in … · 2006-05-23 · classification &...

Risk Management through Information Technology Support in Hong Kong (Hospital Authority)

Dr. Lui Siu-FaiService Director (RM&QA), NTEC

Hospital Authority, Hong Kong

“Safe” Journeythrough the Hospital

for our patientsand staff

☺

“Unsafe” Journeythrough the Hospital

adverse event / injury≈ 10% of patients

≈ 7% of staff“To Err is Human”

Institute of Medicine Report 1999974,400 to 1,243,200 incidents annually

8th leading cause of death (98,000)> RTA, Breast Cancer, AIDS

In any of the busy hospitals in Hong Kong, “things” are happening all the time, not so uncommonly leading to ………..adverse events (& luckily near misses).

Medication errors Fall Missing patient

Blood transfusion incident Complex procedures Work place violenceBlood transfusion reaction Faulty equipments

To reduce harm caused to patients

with the launch of the World Alliance

for Patient Safety.

To advance the patient safety

goal of “First do no harm”

Safety cultureSafety culturePatient and Staff Safety is of paramount importancePatient and Staff Safety is of paramount importance

ReportingReportingcultureculture

ProactiveProactivecultureculture

Just Just cultureculture

LearningLearningCultureCulture

Risk ManagementRisk Management

Risk Management through Information Technology Support in Hong Kong

CE’s Keynote Address for HA Convention 2006

Direction 1: Modernizing HA- Information technology (CMS)

- Decision support for the clinicians

- through in-built prompts and warnings

- support clinical risk management


IT to provide information on RM

IT to provide data on Risk

IT to management risk

IT causing risk

Information via

27,800,0003,700,000,000Information Technology

80,100,000Patient Safety

12,400,400205,700,000Risk Management + Information Technology

22,800,000468,000,000Risk Management

+ Patient Safety

Information via

16,700“Lui SF”104,000“Bates DW”

27,800,0003,700,000,000Information Technology

80,100,000Patient Safety

12,400,400205,700,000Risk Management + Information Technology

22,800,000468,000,000Risk Management

+ Patient Safety

Information via

5,6451,835,92Information Technology

32,265Patient Safety

1,24026,712Risk Management + Information Technology

3,17381,714Risk Management

+ Patient Safety



IT to provide data on RiskAdvanced Incidents Reporting System


IT causing risk

the development

of new reporting systems

to improve patient safety

Immediate reporting of adverse event / near missby frontline staff

Processing of reportsManagement of incidentsClassification & analysis of databy Risk Manager

Instant information on incidents risk assessment, etc. for Department ManagementHospital Management

Learning &sharing

Management,review &decisions

Monitoring

Culture building

Risk reduction

Incidentreporting

Input

Daily return

Enquiry

Reports

Risk analysis

Output

Case filtering

Classification

Investigation& identificationof contributing factors

Preventive Actions / Recommendation

Management

Can see case detail by clicking onto the number

Can drill down to show group within the nature

Can perform filter to show incidents with severity index = > 4

Can shown trend

Can analyse contributory factors

Can easily list events of interest

5231914351Remote

2383123582Unlikely

985142771133Possible

5125109971774Likely

1453528891535Almost Certain

SI=5,6SI=4SI=3SI=2SI=0,1Likelihood

ExtremeMajorModerateMinorInsignificantSeverity

Risk Quantification Summary Report by Date of Occurrence (01 Jan - 31 Dec 2005)

Potential Risk

16 (0.66%)

39 (1.62%)

102(4.23%)

707 (29.3%)

1547 (64.1%)

SI=5,6SI=4SI=3SI=2SI=0,1

ExtremeMajorModerateMinorInsignificant

Risk Quantification Summary Report by Date of Occurrence (01 Jan - 31 Dec 2005)Can quantify

and display Risk matrix (Actual harmand potential risk)

2573204233186200245256207248194253165182All

2%543129124442832Miscellaneous

0%713111Information System & Technology

1%3421224545441Device, Equipment, Pharm Products

0%51112Food Safety & Hygiene

5%124291014156141691298Environment

0%3111Infection Control

1%132112214Staff Related Issues (other than OSH)

10%267223117223043181317171621Staff (Occupational Safety & Health)

3%8361178677107752Visitor (injury/ Behaviours)

46%1189117928778981111071161011317279Patient (injury/ Behaviours)

4%99192722113991466Blood Transfusion

7%1711911171118142021871213Medication

1%1821412332Communication and Consent

1%23442222421Treatment/ Care and Monitoring

13%336143524363042123222312830Investigation

0%3111Examination & Assessment

6%14410151012111115151110915Access, Admission, Transfer, Discharge

% TotalDecNovOctSepAugJulJunMayAprMarFebJan

2005

3111Test result/ Report

12111112212Radiological

11Other investigation

51211Operation/ Procedure

6111111Miscellaneous

51639274252326Laboratory

26511311332213172418282425Label

612111Endoscopic

Consumables

336143524363042123222312830Investigation

211Diagnosis

11Assessment

3111Examination & Assessment

Transport/Ambulance/NEATS

41111Transfer within hospital

87510677371266711Missing patient

52111Miscellaneous

4121Failure to return from authorized leave

11Appointment

211Admission/Transfer in from other institution

4123154862244Absconder/ walk away

Abduction

14410151012111115151110915Access, Admission, Transfer, Discharge

TotalDecNovOctSepAugJulJunMayAprMarFebJanReporting indications

DecNovOctSepAugJulJunMayAprMarFebJan2005

211Self-medication

331423343265Prescription

2842521347Miscellaneous

91111221Handling/ storage

52111Drug adverse reaction

2841212343251Dispensing

10916810514911144657Administration

1711911171118142021871213Medication

Data analysis of Medication incidentsNATURE OF THE INCIDENTS

22

Inappropriate

storage of non-

DD

Inappropriate

storage of DD

Mis-handling of non-

DD

Mis-handling

of DD

Handling/ storage

21179226379863

OthersUnordered drugDose

omissionExtra dose

Wrong time

Wrong freq

Wrong route / method

Wrong patient

Wrong flow rate

Wrong dose

Wrong dose form

Wrong drugAdministration

3114718

OthersDrug omission

Double dispensi

ng

Wrong label

information

Wrong patient

Wrong quantity

Wrong strength / dosage

Wrong dose form

Wrong drugDispensing

12122114719

OthersDose omissionDouble entry

Wrong patient

Wrong instructi

on

Wrong abbrevia

tion

Wrong freq

Wrong duration

Wrong route

Wrong strength / dosage

Wrong dosage form

Wrong drugPrescription

MEDICATION

100

Data analysis of Medication incidentsCONTRIBUTING FACTORS OF THE INCIDENTS

2Unavailability of protocols2Protocol

2Drug infusion / administration process

2Complicated dosage design4Medication related

6PROCESS FACTORS

1System design1IT

2Malfunction/failure/reliability (suspected)2Equipment/supplies3WORK ENVIRONMENT

2Poor quality of information in the notes / documentation

1Illegible

2Incomplete / absent information

1Incomplete documentation

6Communication between staff/ agencies

6COMMUNI-CATION

1Others

4Attitude

1Fatigue

1Violation

13Lapse of concentration

20Personal

56Failure to comply with policies and procedures56Compliance

1experience

5Inadequate knowledge and/or skill6Competence

82STAFFFACTORS

TYPEGROUPNATURE

PWH / NTEC v1 July 2002 - Dec 2003

v2 Dec 2004

Planning / system developmentMs. Janice Wang, Ms. Becky Ho

Dr. WL Cheung, Dr. SF Lui

IT Programming / set upHarry Wong, Christie Choi

PYNED / HKEC

Classification contributing factorFred Chan, Fion Lee

Dr. Betty Young

CMC / KWCDr. Joseph Lui

HAHO RM Ms. Annie AuDr. David Lau

Dr. WL Cheung

HKWCHKECKWCKECKCCNTWCNTEC

HKEHKWKWKEKCNTWNTE

HAHO Risk Management CommitteeData aggregation, analysis, reporting

UPLOADING OF FILTERED DATA

First HAHO report : Q2 2006 (ready 30 Aug 2006)

NTEC TOP 10 Clinical / operational risks

L1025Wrong site surgery Clinical 10

M1535Patient restraintClinical 9

M1535Missing patientClinical 8

M1535Blood Transfusion errorsClinical 7

M1535Patient suicideClinical 6

H2045Infectious disease outbreaksClinical 5

H2555Misidentification of patients (other than blood specimens taking)Clinical 4

H2555Medication incidentsClinical 3

H2555Mislabeling of specimens / blood taking from wrong patientClinical 2

H2555Fall IncidentsClinical 1

PriorityScoreLikelihoodPotentialConsequenceRisk description

1644IT system breakdownOperational 5

1644Needle prick injury Operational 4

1644Manpower/WorkloadOperational 3

2045OSH - Manual handling InjuryOperational 2

2054Work place violence Operational 1

Identified by AIRS reports & Risk Registry Workshop

HA Top 10 clinical risks *Patient identificationMedication error FallInfection control Triage Transfer of patient Communication with patientMedical recordOSHEquipments * Listing not in priority




IT to management riskClinical Management System (CMS)electronic Patient Record (ePR)Laboratory report (CRAS)Medication (MOE, DSS, EDS)Identification (Barcode scanning)

IT causing risk

Leveraging IT to Improve Patient SafetyBall MJ, Garets DE, Handler TJ. Yearbook of Medical informatics International Medical Informatics Association 2003

Technology as Enabler

Computerised Patient Record (CPR)Physician order entryAlerting systemMedical error reporting systems

The helper

The partner

The mentor

Error Impact of Computerised Patient Record (CPR) Generations Source: Gartner, Inc

HA’s Clinical Systems Portfolio

Clinical management System (CMS) electronic Patient Record (ePR)

Approx. 2,000,000 hits (transactions) per day

electronic Patient Record (ePR)

Important clinical information at a glance

170,000 hit per day

Enhancement and use of ePR

To capitalise on the value of ePR

To further promote the use of ePR

To make it more user-friendly- ? alert for critical information- ? profiling base on disease entity- ? as a “Side-kick”- ? assist with MOE, LOE, DSS- ? as default first (front) page

Critical Results Alert System (CRAS)

Lab Staff5. call the corresponding ward

LIS1. found a lab report having critical results and send an alert signal

CMS WS2. alarm triggered and wait for user acknowledgement

Ward Staff3. acknowledge the alert LIS WS

4. alarm will be triggered if NO acknowledgement

Written by: Ms. Flora Pun, CMC API

Critical Results Alert SystemLab Test ResultBiochemistry Na 155 mmol/l

K 6.2 mmol/lCa 3.2 mmol/lBlood Glucose 30.0 mmol/lCSF Glucose 800 iu/lCSF Protein >0.5 g/lBilirubin (neonate) >300 umol/lBlood Gas - PH 200 umol/lSalicylate >2.2 mmol/lDigoxin >3 nmol/l

Haematology Hb 30 sec.APTT >60 sec.

Critical Results Alert System

71009182Monthly average

84%92,399110,183Jan – Dec2005

%Acknowledged By Ward StaffNumber of alert2005

Critical Results Alert System

Useful for in-patient critical result alert(Although some lab prefers to ring up directly)

A system is required for out-patient :notification of important result from routine investigation (patient may not return for follow up for some time)

“Push” and “pull” concept- to allow user to specify to be alerted when result is available

- ? Via intranet email, ?? SMS

Medication related errors

Prescribing (wrong patient, drug, route, dose, frequency)

Dispensing(wrong drug)

Administration(wrong patient, drug, route, dose, frequency)

Medication Order Entry (MOE)

A useful way to reduce errorsCan be enhanced by Decision support System

Evaluation of the pattern of physicians’ responses in handling Computerized Drug Allergy Alertsin MOE system of HA hospitals

The Chief Pharmacist’s Office, HAHO

Implemented across all HA hospitals5 June 04 – 5 March 05First Data BankSystem conversion of previous allergy records = 31704

During a 5 month period(1.4.2005 and 31.8.2005)

2,699 (76%)

7,133 (62%)

11,094(41%) *

Alert Accepted

3,061 (86%)

3,559 (49.5%)7,195

# doctors

7,321 (64%)

11,441 (0.6/%)1,904,771

# Patient

13,777 (0.3%)

4,824,964# prescription

16,224 (59%)

27,318 (0.2%)13,408,319

# items

Alert overwritten

With Drug AlertTotal

Monthly average (1.4.2005 and 31.8.2005)

2,699 (76%)

1,427(62%)

2,219(41%) *

Alert Accepted

3,061 (86%)

3,559 (49.5%)7,195

# doctors

1,462 (64%)

2,288(0.6/%)

380,954# Patient

2,755(0.3%)964,993

# prescription

3,245 (59%)

5,464(0.2%)

2,681,664# items

Alert overwritten

With Drug AlertTotal

No of alert received by individual doctor (n=3559)

3277

23341 7 1

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

'1-21 21-41 41-60 61-80 91-100 101-

120

121

No of alert

No

of d

octo

r

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

4000

Q EH TM H U CH P Y N Q M H P M H P W H CM C K W H TK O Y CH O LM N D H A H N H RH

Number of Accepted / Overridden DA alerts by hospitals

47%

43%

43%

42%

47%

50%

46%

41%

50%

36%

39%

38%

35%

43%

38%

% alert accepted

Panadol (70%)Dologesic (67%)346Paracetamol

Aspirin (17%)Analgesic Balm (44%)357Naproxen

Dologesic (89%)Panaedol (45%)374Dologesic

Cocillana Co (89%)Analgesic Balm (45%)402Ibuprofen

Amoxil ((96%)Augmentin (84%)406Phenoxymethyl Penicillin

Piriton (41%)Panaedol (39%)479Neozep

Brufen (51%)Analgesic Balm (84%)500Methyl Salicylate compound

Cocillana Co (84%)Analgesic Balm (48%)506Mefenamic

Brufen (72%)Analgesic Balm (47%)725Diclofenac

Thymol (77%)Analgesic Balm (55%)1748Aspirin

Top 2 prescribed drug (% alert accepted)No

Top 10 Drug Allergens that triggered DA alerts accepted by physicians

Top 10 Drug Allergens that triggered DA alerts overridden by physicians

Analgesic Balm (74%)Voltaren (85%)462Sulphasalzine

Aspirin (83%)Analgesic Balm (56%)534Naproxen

Aspirin (88%)Analgesic Balm (55%)541Ibuprofen

Panadol (58%)Piriton (60%)580Neozep

Rubesal (70%)Aspirin (90%)628Methyl Salicylate Compound

Aspirin (88%)Analgesic Balm (53%)656Mefenamic

Aspirin (87%)Analgesic Balm (53%)994Diclofenac

Carbimazole (62%)PTU (88%)1127Carbimazole

Lasix (85%)Diamicron (88%)1315Cotrimoxazole

Voltaren (66%)Analgesic Balm (45%)1388Aspirin

Top 2 prescribed drug (% alert accepted)No

Doubts on allergy (12%)Patient already taking drug (70%)Penicillins

No other alternatives (11%)Patient already taking drug (83%)Carbimazole

No other alternatives (3%)Patient already taking drug (93%)Supha

Doubts on allergy (5%)Patient already taking drug (87%)Acetaminophen

No other alternatives (3%)Patient already taking drug (92%)Trimethoprim

No other alternatives (6%)Patient already taking drug (85%)Salicylates

No other alternatives (5%)Patient already taking drug (88%)NSAIDS

Top 2 reasons for overriding

The reasons given by physicians for overriding DA alerts

Medication Decision Support Modules

1 - 2Q 2006Pregnancy Contraindication Checking

completed at all HA hospitals5 June 04 – 5 March 05

Drug Info Enquiry

System conversion of free-text G6PD (20/1/2006)9945 records converted

1- 2Q 2006G6PD Deficiency Contraindication Checking

ProgressImplementation ScheduleModule

Medication Decision Support Modules

To be determinedDosage Range Checking

To be determinedAdverse Drug Reaction Checking

To be determinedDrug-Drug Interaction Checking

ProgressImplementation ScheduleModule

Out-patient: - effective, has reduced errors (? amount)has also cause some errors

- to make best use of Decision SupportingSystem of appropriate / acceptable level

In-patient:- to develop computerised MOE - logistic ++ need COWs

Medication Order Entry (MOE)

To reduce dispensing error- Express Delivery System (EDS)

Reengineering of the dispensing process- separate picking of individual

drug item of a prescription by different person at different station as directed by PMS

Risk reduction process- similar drugs / different dosage are placed on different shelves

Significant improvement of efficiency

Significant risk reduction[28 dispensing incidents / 2,500,000 dispensed items

for a cluster with 4 pharmacies]

Possible measures to prevent mediation errors – administration

Difficult part, operational logistics ++++

eMAR

Barcode scanning

Individual unit packing of drugs

Correct Identification (CID)

Common errors [a cluster reported 1 CID error every 22 hours]

By all staff, at all sites, with any sorts of event

Can (has) caused significant harmto patients

出入醫院出入醫院一路平安一路平安

入院登記CID

病人牌板CID

電腦資料CID

病人手鈪CID

個人標籤CID

病歷紀錄CID

化驗報告CID

抽血檢查CID

醫藥手術CID

出院安排CID

NTEC Patient Safety (CID) Campaign 20 Sep 2004

IT induced risk (identification errors)

With the use of CMSMany potential danger traps for users

to make errors (patient selection, etc) .

Risk identification (reporting, analysis)

Risk reduction strategy / measures

Measures introduced to reduce potential errors when using CMS (1)

1. Select patient boxNot to leave the ID / OP number of the last patient in the “Select Patient” box

2. Patient selection panel (1)Shading of alternative lines

3. Patient selection panel (2)Reposition Chinese name, Sex/age, (ID) closer to left side of the panel


4. Patient Information Box

To make the patient information box more striking - bold, yellow background. - simple clear information- larger font for the name

祝安康 PATIENT, 00001M / 48 Yr DOB : 1 Jan 1958 U000001(5)) Med 5A / 25 Adm: 3 Oct 2004 HN04933010(U)

Alert MKC Details

[Visual Change (CMS)] - Before Change

[Visual Change (CMS)] - After Change

Male patient

Female patient

Unknown sex

Deceased


5. Print queue downtime handlingNot to print lab report to opposite (alternative ward) if the printer is not function, to print to other computer of the same ward with warning, etc

6. Disable PSP patient selection and scanned of barcode working together

Other possible ways to reduce potential errors (identification)

1. Confirmation of logging onto the right patient when selecting a new patientConfirmation check or “ talk back”[front line - objection !]

2. Warning when a CMS station is logged onto another wardWarning and / or different colour

Other possible ways to reduce potential errors

3. Name and ID on report printout Larger font, Chinese name, highlighted, in box, etc.

4. Print out important informationAllergy alert / Case Summary To print allergy alert / Case Summary information - when admitted or transferred to a ward (forcing function when nurse assigning a bed no).

- for patient (instead of hand written allergy card)

Prevention of blood transfusion error

HA to introduce Unique Patient Identification device for Type and Screen for all acute HA hospitals (Annual Plan target 2006 / 2007 )

In the process of sourcing appropriate barcode scanner (1D or 2D) and printer

Exploring the option to extend barcode scanning for patient identification to other areas

Unique Patient Identification device

At PYNEH, May 1999 to April 2006 (7 years) 82,085 blood transfusion requests (T&S) No cases of blood transfusion errors to wrong patient. Wrong labelling / request was detected at bedside

1st generation UPI : development with IT team 4Q1998, full implementation in PYNEH May 1999.

2nd generation UPI : Joint partnership with Rapid Product Development Syndicate,PolyU Technology & Consultancy Company Limited, The Hong Kong Polytechnic UniversityCommened 2Q2002, Fully implemented in PYNEH & RHTSK since July 2004.

PYN DOB: 1971UG006002(8) M 33 yr CHAN, TAI MAN

HN04041735(8) A4 3 MED02/07/2004 13:01 NEP

Hospital Number barcode read as WB04041735(8)

UG006002(8) M 33 yr CHAN, TAI MAN

HN04041735(8) A4 3 MED02/07/2004 13:01 NEP

PYN DOB: 1971

陳大文

Hospital Number barcode read as HN04041735(8)

UPI hospital number barcode read as WN04041735(8)

UPI assisted blood transfusion processUPI assisted blood transfusion process

1 2 3

4 5 6

Proposal of Proposal of Use of Barcode (2D) Use of Barcode (2D)

Scanning Technology Scanning Technology for for

Patient IdentificationPatient Identification

GCRS –ordertests

GCRS Print request order sheet with - name ID (or HN) barcode

- label information in 2D format

group by nature of specimens: blood, urine, sputum, etc

Cross match request form

All other Blood tests

Special Blood test

(e.g. Fasting blood)

Non blood specimens FOB (1)FOB (2)FOB (3)AFB (1)AFB (2)AFB (3)Etc.

Blood taking Scan (1) wristband ID (or HN)barcode

+ Scan (2)request form patient identification (ID or HN) barcode

label(s)generated

Patient Identity Generated wristband with Name, ID (HN, A&E) and barcode with prefix WB_ID (HN, A&E) no

Scan (3)Individual label information on the request form

+

Commercially available barcode scanning / printer

Label printed

By:

Date:

Time:

Label printed

By:

Date:

Time:

Label printed

By:

Date:

Time:

Label printed

By:

Date:

Time:

4 ml Clotted

3 ml EDTA

3

Label printed for cross match

Verify patient at bedside by scanning ID (with pre-fix) on wristband

Blood Taking for Cross match(for doctors)

Scan label information (2D)

Scanning patient’s ID on T&S request form

1

4

2

If IDs matched

3


Scanning patient’s ID on blood product

+ Blood product unit no+/- Nurse ID barcode

1

2

If IDs matched

Blood administration(for nursing)

Allowed to generated label(s)for blood transfusion recordfor sticking onto casenote / blood transfusion record

3

Label(s) printed


Scan label(s) information

Scanning patient’s ID on request sheet

1

4

2

If IDs matched

Blood taking for other blood tests(for doctors, phlebotomists, nurses)

3

Label(s) printed


Scan label(s) information

Scanning patient’s ID on request sheet

1

4

2

If IDs matched

For non-blood specimens(for nurses)

1 2

3 4 5

Prepared by Risk Management Team, NTEC

A (Patient bracelet’s ID, HN, A&E, OP no)

B (Forms)T&S request formInvestigation list

OT / procedure list

C (Objects)

Specimen

Scan ID of A and Bif A= B

Produce label for C

B (Objects)Blood product

Drug (chemo-drug)Radio-isotopes, etc.

C (case note / record form)

for record purpose





IT causing error / risk

Role of Computerized Physician Order Entry System in facilitating medication errorsKoppel R, et al. JAMA Mar 2005 Vol 293:10:1197

22 types of medication error risk.- Information errors- Human-machine interface flawsFragmented CPOE displaysInventory displays mistaken for dosage guidelinesSeparation of functions that facilitate double dosing / incompatible ordersInflexible order format

75% of house staff (N=261) reported observed these error risks, - more than once per day 2-12%- once a day 5-12%- about few time per week 12-30%.

Errors with the use of CMS

Select the wrong patientForget to change to the next patient

wrong prescription laboratory order appointment etc

Select wrong drug, preparation, dosage, route, frequency

Misreading by barcode scanning

At out-patient clinic phebotomy station

OR0500521131 for patient A misread as OR0500621131 for patient B

pwhor0600103698 for patient X misread as pwhor0600103608 for patient Y

CHECK DIGIT algorithm within the OR no. for CMS(GCRS), LIS/RIS systemstarting from early April 2006 .

Duplication of HN numbers

Temporary HN numbers are used during downtime of CMS at admission office.

Same set of number re-used during the next CMS down time

Only discovered when a patient’s result was noted to be abnormal – due to automatic merging of lab result based on ID.

Concluding remarks

With appropriate and effective use, IT can be an enabler for Risk Managementas a helper & partner, (mentor).

Balance of - being helpful vs. (perceived) hindrance - benefit vs. (perceived) waste of time - cost-effectiveness ($ and time)

☺

Ensure a Safe Journey through the Hospital

for our patients

☺

☺

Wantingto come to work

Doing a good day’s work Happy Going

home

Ensure a Safe Journey through the Hospital

for staff

☺

Thank you

AIRS task group Ms. Becky Ho, Ms. Janice WangMr. Harry Wong, Ms. Christine ChoiMs. Fred Chan, Dr. Betty Young, KECDr. Joseph Lui, KWCMs. Annie Au, Dr. David Lau, Dr. WL Cheung, HAHO

Acknowledgment

NTEC RM team

HAHO IT team Dr. NT Cheung, Mr. Anthony Cheung, et al. HAHO CPO teamMs. SC Chiang, Ms. Anna Lee, Mr PW Lee, et al.

PYNEH Dr. Raymond Chu

risk management through information technology support in … · 2006-05-23 · classification &...

Documents