使用电子健康记录识别住院期间每日主要提供者。

Q4 Medicine
Critical care explorations Pub Date : 2024-12-19 eCollection Date: 2024-12-01 DOI:10.1097/CCE.0000000000001189
Nicholas E Ingraham, Daniel Shyu, Tom Phelan, Nathan Mesfin, Benjamin Langworthy, Rachel Kohn, Meeta Prasad Kerlin, R Adams Dudley
{"title":"使用电子健康记录识别住院期间每日主要提供者。","authors":"Nicholas E Ingraham, Daniel Shyu, Tom Phelan, Nathan Mesfin, Benjamin Langworthy, Rachel Kohn, Meeta Prasad Kerlin, R Adams Dudley","doi":"10.1097/CCE.0000000000001189","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Providers vary in their impact on clinical outcomes, but this is rarely accounted for in healthcare research. By failing to identify the provider responsible for a patient's care, investigators miss an opportunity to account for nonrandom variation in outcomes. Prior methods of identifying responsible providers have relied on manual chart review, which is time-consuming and expensive, or analysis of claims data, which has been demonstrated to be inaccurate. To address these gaps, we sought to develop an algorithm using electronic health record (EHR) data to identify the responsible provider for each day of a patient's hospitalization.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>A multicenter retrospective cohort study.</p><p><strong>Setting: </strong>Midwest healthcare system.</p><p><strong>Patients: </strong>Hospitalized patients and their providers.</p><p><strong>Interventions: </strong>None.</p><p><strong>Measurements and main results: </strong>We first confirmed high inter-rater reliability of manual chart review to identify the responsible provider. Using manual chart review as the gold standard, we then assessed the accuracy of an automated algorithm in a set of randomly selected patients. The agreement between two independent physicians in their determination of the responsible provider by chart review was 100%. Among 200 randomly selected patients, the algorithm identified the same responsible provider as the physician chart reviewer on 93% (3372/3626; 95% CI, 92-94%) of patient-days.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Readily available EHR data can be used to assign patients to providers daily with a high degree of accuracy. This methodology could be applied in healthcare research to identify sources of variation other than the intervention being studied.</p>","PeriodicalId":93957,"journal":{"name":"Critical care explorations","volume":"6 12","pages":"e1189"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11661743/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Using Electronic Health Records to Identify the Daily Primary Provider During Hospitalization.\",\"authors\":\"Nicholas E Ingraham, Daniel Shyu, Tom Phelan, Nathan Mesfin, Benjamin Langworthy, Rachel Kohn, Meeta Prasad Kerlin, R Adams Dudley\",\"doi\":\"10.1097/CCE.0000000000001189\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Providers vary in their impact on clinical outcomes, but this is rarely accounted for in healthcare research. By failing to identify the provider responsible for a patient's care, investigators miss an opportunity to account for nonrandom variation in outcomes. Prior methods of identifying responsible providers have relied on manual chart review, which is time-consuming and expensive, or analysis of claims data, which has been demonstrated to be inaccurate. To address these gaps, we sought to develop an algorithm using electronic health record (EHR) data to identify the responsible provider for each day of a patient's hospitalization.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>A multicenter retrospective cohort study.</p><p><strong>Setting: </strong>Midwest healthcare system.</p><p><strong>Patients: </strong>Hospitalized patients and their providers.</p><p><strong>Interventions: </strong>None.</p><p><strong>Measurements and main results: </strong>We first confirmed high inter-rater reliability of manual chart review to identify the responsible provider. Using manual chart review as the gold standard, we then assessed the accuracy of an automated algorithm in a set of randomly selected patients. The agreement between two independent physicians in their determination of the responsible provider by chart review was 100%. Among 200 randomly selected patients, the algorithm identified the same responsible provider as the physician chart reviewer on 93% (3372/3626; 95% CI, 92-94%) of patient-days.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Readily available EHR data can be used to assign patients to providers daily with a high degree of accuracy. This methodology could be applied in healthcare research to identify sources of variation other than the intervention being studied.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":93957,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Critical care explorations\",\"volume\":\"6 12\",\"pages\":\"e1189\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-12-19\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11661743/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Critical care explorations\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1097/CCE.0000000000001189\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/12/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"Medicine\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Critical care explorations","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/CCE.0000000000001189","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/12/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:提供者对临床结果的影响各不相同,但在医疗保健研究中很少考虑到这一点。由于未能确定负责患者护理的提供者,调查人员错过了解释结果非随机变化的机会。以前确定负责任的供应商的方法依赖于人工图表审查,这既耗时又昂贵,或者依赖于对索赔数据的分析,这已被证明是不准确的。为了解决这些差距,我们试图开发一种使用电子健康记录(EHR)数据的算法,以确定患者住院的每一天的责任提供者。设计:一项多中心回顾性队列研究。背景:中西部医疗保健系统。患者:住院患者及其提供者。干预措施:没有。测量和主要结果:我们首先确认了手工图表审查的高可靠性,以确定负责任的提供者。然后,我们使用手动图表检查作为金标准,在一组随机选择的患者中评估自动算法的准确性。两名独立的医生在通过病历审查确定责任提供者方面的一致性为100%。在随机选择的200名患者中,该算法识别出与医生图表审稿人相同的负责任提供者的比例为93% (3372/3626;95% CI, 92-94%)。结论:随时可用的电子病历数据可用于将患者分配给每天的提供者,准确度很高。这种方法可以应用于医疗保健研究,以确定除被研究的干预措施之外的变异来源。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Using Electronic Health Records to Identify the Daily Primary Provider During Hospitalization.

Objectives: Providers vary in their impact on clinical outcomes, but this is rarely accounted for in healthcare research. By failing to identify the provider responsible for a patient's care, investigators miss an opportunity to account for nonrandom variation in outcomes. Prior methods of identifying responsible providers have relied on manual chart review, which is time-consuming and expensive, or analysis of claims data, which has been demonstrated to be inaccurate. To address these gaps, we sought to develop an algorithm using electronic health record (EHR) data to identify the responsible provider for each day of a patient's hospitalization.

Design: A multicenter retrospective cohort study.

Setting: Midwest healthcare system.

Patients: Hospitalized patients and their providers.

Interventions: None.

Measurements and main results: We first confirmed high inter-rater reliability of manual chart review to identify the responsible provider. Using manual chart review as the gold standard, we then assessed the accuracy of an automated algorithm in a set of randomly selected patients. The agreement between two independent physicians in their determination of the responsible provider by chart review was 100%. Among 200 randomly selected patients, the algorithm identified the same responsible provider as the physician chart reviewer on 93% (3372/3626; 95% CI, 92-94%) of patient-days.

Conclusions: Readily available EHR data can be used to assign patients to providers daily with a high degree of accuracy. This methodology could be applied in healthcare research to identify sources of variation other than the intervention being studied.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
8 weeks
×
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