A Survey for Charting Intake, Output, and Body Weight in the Electronic Medical Record.

IF 0.9 4区 医学 Q4 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Journal for Healthcare Quality Pub Date : 2024-09-01 Epub Date: 2024-05-14 DOI:10.1097/JHQ.0000000000000437
Jianling Tao, Sara May, Mingyi Li, Marianne Monahan, Donna Phanumas, Charles Seelig
{"title":"A Survey for Charting Intake, Output, and Body Weight in the Electronic Medical Record.","authors":"Jianling Tao, Sara May, Mingyi Li, Marianne Monahan, Donna Phanumas, Charles Seelig","doi":"10.1097/JHQ.0000000000000437","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The accuracy of documentation of body weight and fluid balance in hospitalized patients is frequently questioned.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a survey to understand provider perceptions of the accuracy of intake, output, and weight charting in the electronic medical record. We sent a six-item questionnaire to nurses and physicians who provide inpatient service in a community-based teaching hospital of the Northeastern United States. We compared the response difference between nurses and physicians by Fisher exact test.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>One hundred eight nurses and 39 physicians participated in the survey. Both nurses and physicians responded that the accuracy of documentation is crucial. However, only 25.7% of participating physicians and 38.3% of participating nurses considered that documentation in the electronic medical record is reliable. Both physicians and nurses assumed that the nurses are too busy to collect and document the data, and the variability of non-patient weight and variations in body weight measurement under different conditions account for inaccuracies in the documented body weight.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Assessing the accuracy of documenting intake, output, and body weight in the electronic medical record is warranted. Providers believe that educating patients about fluid balance and volume assessment help to improve the accuracy in charting intake, output, and body weight in the electronic medical record.</p>","PeriodicalId":48801,"journal":{"name":"Journal for Healthcare Quality","volume":" ","pages":"293-299"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal for Healthcare Quality","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/JHQ.0000000000000437","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/5/14 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: The accuracy of documentation of body weight and fluid balance in hospitalized patients is frequently questioned.

Methods: We conducted a survey to understand provider perceptions of the accuracy of intake, output, and weight charting in the electronic medical record. We sent a six-item questionnaire to nurses and physicians who provide inpatient service in a community-based teaching hospital of the Northeastern United States. We compared the response difference between nurses and physicians by Fisher exact test.

Results: One hundred eight nurses and 39 physicians participated in the survey. Both nurses and physicians responded that the accuracy of documentation is crucial. However, only 25.7% of participating physicians and 38.3% of participating nurses considered that documentation in the electronic medical record is reliable. Both physicians and nurses assumed that the nurses are too busy to collect and document the data, and the variability of non-patient weight and variations in body weight measurement under different conditions account for inaccuracies in the documented body weight.

Conclusions: Assessing the accuracy of documenting intake, output, and body weight in the electronic medical record is warranted. Providers believe that educating patients about fluid balance and volume assessment help to improve the accuracy in charting intake, output, and body weight in the electronic medical record.

在电子病历中记录摄入量、排出量和体重的调查。
背景:住院患者体重和体液平衡记录的准确性经常受到质疑:住院患者体重和体液平衡记录的准确性经常受到质疑:我们进行了一项调查,以了解医疗服务提供者对电子病历中摄入量、排出量和体重记录准确性的看法。我们向美国东北部一家社区教学医院中提供住院服务的护士和医生发送了一份包含六个项目的调查问卷。我们通过费舍尔精确检验比较了护士和医生的回答差异:118 名护士和 39 名医生参与了调查。护士和医生都认为记录的准确性至关重要。然而,只有 25.7% 的医生和 38.3% 的护士认为电子病历中的记录是可靠的。医生和护士都认为,护士太忙,没有时间收集和记录数据,而非患者体重的变化和不同条件下体重测量的差异是造成记录体重不准确的原因:结论:有必要对电子病历中记录摄入量、排出量和体重的准确性进行评估。医疗服务提供者认为,对患者进行体液平衡和容量评估教育有助于提高电子病历中记录摄入量、排出量和体重的准确性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal for Healthcare Quality
Journal for Healthcare Quality HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES-
CiteScore
2.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
59
期刊介绍: The Journal for Healthcare Quality (JHQ), a peer-reviewed journal, is an official publication of the National Association for Healthcare Quality. JHQ is a professional forum that continuously advances healthcare quality practice in diverse and changing environments, and is the first choice for creative and scientific solutions in the pursuit of healthcare quality. It has been selected for coverage in Thomson Reuter’s Science Citation Index Expanded, Social Sciences Citation Index®, and Current Contents®. The Journal publishes scholarly articles that are targeted to leaders of all healthcare settings, leveraging applied research and producing practical, timely and impactful evidence in healthcare system transformation. The journal covers topics such as: Quality Improvement • Patient Safety • Performance Measurement • Best Practices in Clinical and Operational Processes • Innovation • Leadership • Information Technology • Spreading Improvement • Sustaining Improvement • Cost Reduction • Payment Reform
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信