Natalie Yass, Rebekah Walker, Sneha Nagavally, Cynthia Kay
{"title":"Use of Flags in the Electronic Medical Record: A Retrospective Analysis.","authors":"Natalie Yass, Rebekah Walker, Sneha Nagavally, Cynthia Kay","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Implicit bias in patient care and outcomes is well documented. However, the presence of bias in hospital security interactions is a relatively new area of research. Flags placed on the electronic medical record identify patients considered high risk for negative outcomes, including those with security interactions.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>We sought to explore the types of flags and their frequency, differences among patients with flags, and their pattern over time.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a retrospective chart review of flags placed on electronic medical records over 13 years of adults 18 years or older who were patients at a Midwest, tertiary, academic medical center. Descriptive statistics were used to explore patient demographic data. Chi-square tests were executed to compare patients with different flag types.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Three flag types were investigated: \"communication alert,\" \"vulnerable/unsafe, behavior\" and \"risk management.\" The communication alert flag was most common, although Black male patients were more likely to receive a vulnerable/unsafe behavior flag than a communication alert flag (P = 0.001). Patients who were prescribed anti-anxiety medications, antidepressants, antipsychotics, and psychotherapeutics also were more likely to receive a vulnerable/unsafe behavior flag than a communication alert flag (P = 0.001). The highest number of flags was placed during quarter 3 - the months of July, August, and September.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Records of patients with certain demographics and on certain medications were more likely to be labeled with vulnerable/unsafe behavior flags. There is no clear protocol to determine what behaviors elicit which flag. Standardized procedures could help provide transparency to this issue.</p>","PeriodicalId":94268,"journal":{"name":"WMJ : official publication of the State Medical Society of Wisconsin","volume":"124 1","pages":"42-46"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"WMJ : official publication of the State Medical Society of Wisconsin","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Introduction: Implicit bias in patient care and outcomes is well documented. However, the presence of bias in hospital security interactions is a relatively new area of research. Flags placed on the electronic medical record identify patients considered high risk for negative outcomes, including those with security interactions.
Objective: We sought to explore the types of flags and their frequency, differences among patients with flags, and their pattern over time.
Methods: We conducted a retrospective chart review of flags placed on electronic medical records over 13 years of adults 18 years or older who were patients at a Midwest, tertiary, academic medical center. Descriptive statistics were used to explore patient demographic data. Chi-square tests were executed to compare patients with different flag types.
Results: Three flag types were investigated: "communication alert," "vulnerable/unsafe, behavior" and "risk management." The communication alert flag was most common, although Black male patients were more likely to receive a vulnerable/unsafe behavior flag than a communication alert flag (P = 0.001). Patients who were prescribed anti-anxiety medications, antidepressants, antipsychotics, and psychotherapeutics also were more likely to receive a vulnerable/unsafe behavior flag than a communication alert flag (P = 0.001). The highest number of flags was placed during quarter 3 - the months of July, August, and September.
Conclusions: Records of patients with certain demographics and on certain medications were more likely to be labeled with vulnerable/unsafe behavior flags. There is no clear protocol to determine what behaviors elicit which flag. Standardized procedures could help provide transparency to this issue.