Linking Patient Encounters across Primary and Ancillary Electronic Health Record Systems: A Comparison of Two Approaches.

ACI open Pub Date : 2024-01-01 Epub Date: 2024-04-10 DOI:10.1055/s-0044-1782679
Marcos A Davila, Evan T Sholle, Xiaobo Fuld, Mark L Israel, Curtis L Cole, Thomas R Campion
{"title":"Linking Patient Encounters across Primary and Ancillary Electronic Health Record Systems: A Comparison of Two Approaches.","authors":"Marcos A Davila, Evan T Sholle, Xiaobo Fuld, Mark L Israel, Curtis L Cole, Thomas R Campion","doi":"10.1055/s-0044-1782679","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>To achieve scientific goals, researchers often require integration of data from a primary electronic health record (EHR) system and one or more ancillary EHR systems used during the same patient care encounter. Although studies have demonstrated approaches for linking patient identity records across different EHR systems, little is known about linking patient encounter records across primary and ancillary EHR systems.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>We compared a patients-first approach versus an encounters-first approach for linking patient encounter records across multiple EHR systems.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a retrospective observational study of 348,904 patients with 533,283 encounters from 2010 to 2020 across our institution's primary EHR system and an ancillary EHR system used in perioperative settings. For the patients-first approach and the encounters-first approach, we measured the number of patient and encounter links created as well as runtime.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>While the patients-first approach linked 43% of patients and 49% of encounters, the encounters-first approach linked 98% of patients and 100% of encounters. The encounters-first approach was 20 times faster than the patients-first approach for linking patients and 33% slower for linking encounters.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Findings suggest that common patient and encounter identifiers shared among EHR systems via automated interfaces may be clinically useful but not \"research-ready\" and thus require an encounters-first linkage approach to enable secondary use for scientific purposes. Based on our search, this study is among the first to demonstrate approaches for linking patient encounters across multiple EHR systems. Enterprise data warehouse for research efforts elsewhere may benefit from an encounters-first approach.</p>","PeriodicalId":72041,"journal":{"name":"ACI open","volume":"8 1","pages":"e43-e48"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11101195/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ACI open","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0044-1782679","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/4/10 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: To achieve scientific goals, researchers often require integration of data from a primary electronic health record (EHR) system and one or more ancillary EHR systems used during the same patient care encounter. Although studies have demonstrated approaches for linking patient identity records across different EHR systems, little is known about linking patient encounter records across primary and ancillary EHR systems.

Objectives: We compared a patients-first approach versus an encounters-first approach for linking patient encounter records across multiple EHR systems.

Methods: We conducted a retrospective observational study of 348,904 patients with 533,283 encounters from 2010 to 2020 across our institution's primary EHR system and an ancillary EHR system used in perioperative settings. For the patients-first approach and the encounters-first approach, we measured the number of patient and encounter links created as well as runtime.

Results: While the patients-first approach linked 43% of patients and 49% of encounters, the encounters-first approach linked 98% of patients and 100% of encounters. The encounters-first approach was 20 times faster than the patients-first approach for linking patients and 33% slower for linking encounters.

Conclusion: Findings suggest that common patient and encounter identifiers shared among EHR systems via automated interfaces may be clinically useful but not "research-ready" and thus require an encounters-first linkage approach to enable secondary use for scientific purposes. Based on our search, this study is among the first to demonstrate approaches for linking patient encounters across multiple EHR systems. Enterprise data warehouse for research efforts elsewhere may benefit from an encounters-first approach.

在主电子健康记录系统和辅助电子健康记录系统之间连接患者会诊:两种方法的比较。
背景:为实现科学目标,研究人员通常需要整合来自主要电子健康记录(EHR)系统和一个或多个辅助电子健康记录系统的数据,这些数据在同一患者护理过程中使用。虽然已有研究证明了在不同的电子病历系统中连接患者身份记录的方法,但对于在主要电子病历系统和辅助电子病历系统中连接患者就诊记录的方法却知之甚少:我们比较了在多个电子病历系统间链接患者就诊记录的患者优先法和就诊记录优先法:我们对本机构的主要电子病历系统和用于围手术期的辅助电子病历系统在 2010 年至 2020 年期间的 348,904 名患者和 533,283 次就诊记录进行了回顾性观察研究。对于 "患者优先 "方法和 "病例优先 "方法,我们测量了所创建的患者和病例链接的数量以及运行时间:结果:患者优先法链接了 43% 的患者和 49% 的病例,而病例优先法链接了 98% 的患者和 100% 的病例。在连接患者时,"病例优先 "方法比 "患者优先 "方法快 20 倍,而在连接病例时,"病例优先 "方法比 "患者优先 "方法慢 33%:研究结果表明,通过自动界面在电子病历系统之间共享的通用患者和病例标识符可能对临床有用,但并非 "研究就绪",因此需要采用病例优先的链接方法,以实现科研目的的二次使用。根据我们的搜索,本研究是首批展示跨多个电子病历系统链接患者病历的方法的研究之一。其他地方用于研究工作的企业数据仓库可能会受益于 "病例优先 "方法。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信