Azam Shahbodaghi, H. Moghaddasi, F. Asadi, Azamossadat Hosseini
{"title":"医疗记录中的文档错误和缺陷:系统回顾","authors":"Azam Shahbodaghi, H. Moghaddasi, F. Asadi, Azamossadat Hosseini","doi":"10.1177/09720634241229545","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Introduction: Identifying errors in documentation can improve the quality of medical records, healthcare services and health care systems, and thus provide a good framework for improvements in documentation policies. To this end, the current research systematically examined studies reporting documentation errors and deficiencies in medical records. Method: The systematic review was conducted based on PRISMA. Original articles, published in English from January 2009 to April 2019, were retrieved using the Web of Science, Scopus, EMBASE, PubMed and Google Scholar. Results: A total of 7,624 articles were found. After the exclusion of duplicates and irrelevant items from this total, just 48 articles met the requirements of the study, among which 47 had some sorts of incompleteness; inaccuracy, 14 articles; inconsistency, 8 articles; illegibility, 7 articles; unsigned document, 4 articles and irrelevancy, 2 articles. Factors contributing to the incidence of documentation errors included occupational stressors, manual documentation and absence of or a defect in local, national and international standards or guidelines, with 12, 9 and 11 articles, respectively. Discussion: Incompleteness, inaccuracy and inconsistency are common errors in medical records documentation. Adopting necessary policies for enhancing the quality of documentation, making strides towards electronic documentation equipped with automatic error detection systems, and standardising the documentation process can be of great assistance in minimising documentation errors and deficiencies.","PeriodicalId":45421,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Health Management","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Documentation Errors and Deficiencies in Medical Records: A Systematic Review\",\"authors\":\"Azam Shahbodaghi, H. Moghaddasi, F. Asadi, Azamossadat Hosseini\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/09720634241229545\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Introduction: Identifying errors in documentation can improve the quality of medical records, healthcare services and health care systems, and thus provide a good framework for improvements in documentation policies. To this end, the current research systematically examined studies reporting documentation errors and deficiencies in medical records. Method: The systematic review was conducted based on PRISMA. Original articles, published in English from January 2009 to April 2019, were retrieved using the Web of Science, Scopus, EMBASE, PubMed and Google Scholar. Results: A total of 7,624 articles were found. After the exclusion of duplicates and irrelevant items from this total, just 48 articles met the requirements of the study, among which 47 had some sorts of incompleteness; inaccuracy, 14 articles; inconsistency, 8 articles; illegibility, 7 articles; unsigned document, 4 articles and irrelevancy, 2 articles. Factors contributing to the incidence of documentation errors included occupational stressors, manual documentation and absence of or a defect in local, national and international standards or guidelines, with 12, 9 and 11 articles, respectively. Discussion: Incompleteness, inaccuracy and inconsistency are common errors in medical records documentation. Adopting necessary policies for enhancing the quality of documentation, making strides towards electronic documentation equipped with automatic error detection systems, and standardising the documentation process can be of great assistance in minimising documentation errors and deficiencies.\",\"PeriodicalId\":45421,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Health Management\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-03-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Health Management\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/09720634241229545\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Health Management","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/09720634241229545","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
导言:识别文件记录中的错误可以提高医疗记录、医疗服务和医疗系统的质量,从而为改进文件记录政策提供一个良好的框架。为此,本研究对报告医疗记录中的文件错误和缺陷的研究进行了系统性检查。方法:根据 PRISMA 进行系统性审查。使用 Web of Science、Scopus、EMBASE、PubMed 和 Google Scholar 检索 2009 年 1 月至 2019 年 4 月期间发表的英文原创文章。结果:共找到 7624 篇文章。在剔除重复和不相关的文章后,仅有48篇文章符合研究要求,其中47篇存在不完整的情况;不准确的文章有14篇;不一致的文章有8篇;难以辨认的文章有7篇;未署名的文件有4篇;不相关的文章有2篇。导致文件错误发生的因素包括职业压力、手工文件以及地方、国家和国际标准或指南的缺失或缺陷,分别有 12 篇、9 篇和 11 篇。讨论不完整、不准确和不一致是医疗记录文档中常见的错误。采取必要的政策来提高文档质量,大力发展配备自动错误检测系统的电子文档,以及规范文档流程,对减少文档错误和缺陷有很大帮助。
Documentation Errors and Deficiencies in Medical Records: A Systematic Review
Introduction: Identifying errors in documentation can improve the quality of medical records, healthcare services and health care systems, and thus provide a good framework for improvements in documentation policies. To this end, the current research systematically examined studies reporting documentation errors and deficiencies in medical records. Method: The systematic review was conducted based on PRISMA. Original articles, published in English from January 2009 to April 2019, were retrieved using the Web of Science, Scopus, EMBASE, PubMed and Google Scholar. Results: A total of 7,624 articles were found. After the exclusion of duplicates and irrelevant items from this total, just 48 articles met the requirements of the study, among which 47 had some sorts of incompleteness; inaccuracy, 14 articles; inconsistency, 8 articles; illegibility, 7 articles; unsigned document, 4 articles and irrelevancy, 2 articles. Factors contributing to the incidence of documentation errors included occupational stressors, manual documentation and absence of or a defect in local, national and international standards or guidelines, with 12, 9 and 11 articles, respectively. Discussion: Incompleteness, inaccuracy and inconsistency are common errors in medical records documentation. Adopting necessary policies for enhancing the quality of documentation, making strides towards electronic documentation equipped with automatic error detection systems, and standardising the documentation process can be of great assistance in minimising documentation errors and deficiencies.