患者报告的症状与门诊期间肾病专家记录的比较:一项回顾性患者报告的结果测量研究

IF 3.4 Q1 UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY
Kendra E. Wulczyn , Annie Liu , James P. Lash , Mallika L. Mendu , Sahir Kalim
{"title":"患者报告的症状与门诊期间肾病专家记录的比较:一项回顾性患者报告的结果测量研究","authors":"Kendra E. Wulczyn ,&nbsp;Annie Liu ,&nbsp;James P. Lash ,&nbsp;Mallika L. Mendu ,&nbsp;Sahir Kalim","doi":"10.1016/j.xkme.2025.101011","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Rationale &amp; Objective</h3><div>Communication of symptom presence between patients and nephrologists is a key step toward management of the symptom burden faced by many patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD), but whether symptoms are being routinely discussed during ambulatory non-dialysis nephrology encounters is uncertain. This study compared patient reports of 11 CKD-related symptoms with nephrologists’ documentation of symptom presence in the concomitant visit note.</div></div><div><h3>Study Design</h3><div>A retrospective analysis of patient-reported outcome measures and nephrologist documentation in the electronic health record (EHR).</div></div><div><h3>Setting &amp; Study Populations</h3><div>Adults treated at 2 ambulatory nephrology practices within a single tertiary academic center in the United States from 2015 to 2020.</div></div><div><h3>Data Extraction</h3><div>Patients reported symptoms using the Kidney Disease Quality of Life Short Form (KDQOL-SF) instrument before clinic visits. Symptoms were identified in the EHR-based note by natural language processing with subsequent manual identification of the context.</div></div><div><h3>Analytical Approach</h3><div>Sensitivity and specificity of nephrologist documentation for symptoms were calculated using KDQOL responses as the reference standard and stratified by numerous patient, nephrologist, and encounter characteristics.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Over 4 years, 1,534 patients completed 2,118 KDQOL surveys before visits with 45 nephrologists. Average sensitivity of nephrologist documentation for symptoms was 16% (and<!--> <!-->&lt;40% for each individual symptom), with an average specificity of 98%. Sensitivity of documentation for symptoms was higher when the patient was female, had an estimated glomerular filtration rate of<!--> <!-->&lt;30<!--> <!-->mL/min/1.73<!--> <!-->m<sup>2</sup>, or had a history of cardiovascular disease. The documentation sensitivity of nephrologists was higher if they were female or were in practice for<!--> <!-->≤7 years as compared with<!--> <!-->&gt;25 years.</div></div><div><h3>Limitations</h3><div>Nephrologist documentation in the EHR may not accurately represent what was discussed during a visit.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>Accuracy of nephrologist documentation for the presence of CKD-related symptoms in the EHR is low. Although recognizing that symptoms may have been assessed but not documented, the low proportion of clinic notes correctly identifying patient symptoms in this study suggests an opportunity for tools to streamline and standardize symptom assessment in this patient population.</div></div><div><h3>Plain Language Summary</h3><div>This study aimed to characterize how accurate the documentation of nephrologists is when it comes to patient-reported symptoms commonly associated with chronic kidney disease. Patients completed an electronic questionnaire regarding their symptoms before visits at 2 general nephrology clinics, and the responses were compared with documentation in the electronic health record by their nephrologists. We found that despite a prevalence higher than 50% for some symptoms related to chronic kidney disease, the proportion of nephrologist notes correctly identifying symptom presence averaged 16%. We believe this suggests a likely gap in communication between patients and nephrologists regarding symptoms and believe that tools for standardizing symptom assessment in routine nephrology care may help bridge this gap.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":17885,"journal":{"name":"Kidney Medicine","volume":"7 6","pages":"Article 101011"},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Patient-Reported Symptoms Compared With Nephrologist Documentation During Outpatient Visits: A Retrospective Patient-Reported Outcome Measures Study\",\"authors\":\"Kendra E. Wulczyn ,&nbsp;Annie Liu ,&nbsp;James P. Lash ,&nbsp;Mallika L. Mendu ,&nbsp;Sahir Kalim\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.xkme.2025.101011\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Rationale &amp; Objective</h3><div>Communication of symptom presence between patients and nephrologists is a key step toward management of the symptom burden faced by many patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD), but whether symptoms are being routinely discussed during ambulatory non-dialysis nephrology encounters is uncertain. This study compared patient reports of 11 CKD-related symptoms with nephrologists’ documentation of symptom presence in the concomitant visit note.</div></div><div><h3>Study Design</h3><div>A retrospective analysis of patient-reported outcome measures and nephrologist documentation in the electronic health record (EHR).</div></div><div><h3>Setting &amp; Study Populations</h3><div>Adults treated at 2 ambulatory nephrology practices within a single tertiary academic center in the United States from 2015 to 2020.</div></div><div><h3>Data Extraction</h3><div>Patients reported symptoms using the Kidney Disease Quality of Life Short Form (KDQOL-SF) instrument before clinic visits. Symptoms were identified in the EHR-based note by natural language processing with subsequent manual identification of the context.</div></div><div><h3>Analytical Approach</h3><div>Sensitivity and specificity of nephrologist documentation for symptoms were calculated using KDQOL responses as the reference standard and stratified by numerous patient, nephrologist, and encounter characteristics.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Over 4 years, 1,534 patients completed 2,118 KDQOL surveys before visits with 45 nephrologists. Average sensitivity of nephrologist documentation for symptoms was 16% (and<!--> <!-->&lt;40% for each individual symptom), with an average specificity of 98%. Sensitivity of documentation for symptoms was higher when the patient was female, had an estimated glomerular filtration rate of<!--> <!-->&lt;30<!--> <!-->mL/min/1.73<!--> <!-->m<sup>2</sup>, or had a history of cardiovascular disease. The documentation sensitivity of nephrologists was higher if they were female or were in practice for<!--> <!-->≤7 years as compared with<!--> <!-->&gt;25 years.</div></div><div><h3>Limitations</h3><div>Nephrologist documentation in the EHR may not accurately represent what was discussed during a visit.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>Accuracy of nephrologist documentation for the presence of CKD-related symptoms in the EHR is low. Although recognizing that symptoms may have been assessed but not documented, the low proportion of clinic notes correctly identifying patient symptoms in this study suggests an opportunity for tools to streamline and standardize symptom assessment in this patient population.</div></div><div><h3>Plain Language Summary</h3><div>This study aimed to characterize how accurate the documentation of nephrologists is when it comes to patient-reported symptoms commonly associated with chronic kidney disease. Patients completed an electronic questionnaire regarding their symptoms before visits at 2 general nephrology clinics, and the responses were compared with documentation in the electronic health record by their nephrologists. We found that despite a prevalence higher than 50% for some symptoms related to chronic kidney disease, the proportion of nephrologist notes correctly identifying symptom presence averaged 16%. We believe this suggests a likely gap in communication between patients and nephrologists regarding symptoms and believe that tools for standardizing symptom assessment in routine nephrology care may help bridge this gap.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":17885,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Kidney Medicine\",\"volume\":\"7 6\",\"pages\":\"Article 101011\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-04-17\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Kidney Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2590059525000470\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Kidney Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2590059525000470","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

基本原理及目的:患者与肾病专家之间的症状交流是许多慢性肾病(CKD)患者所面临的症状负担管理的关键步骤,但在非透析肾脏病门诊会诊中,症状是否被常规讨论尚不确定。本研究比较了患者报告的11种ckd相关症状与肾病学家在伴随就诊记录中记录的症状。研究设计:回顾性分析患者报告的结果测量和电子健康记录(EHR)中的肾病学家记录。设置,研究人群:2015年至2020年,在美国一个三级学术中心的2个流动肾脏病诊所接受治疗的成年人。数据提取患者在就诊前使用肾脏疾病生活质量短表(KDQOL-SF)仪器报告症状。症状是通过自然语言处理在基于电子病历的记录中识别出来的,随后手动识别上下文。分析方法:以KDQOL反应作为参考标准,并根据众多患者、肾病专家和就诊特征进行分层,计算肾病专家对症状记录的敏感性和特异性。结果在4年多的时间里,1534例患者在拜访45名肾病专家之前完成了2118项KDQOL调查。肾科医生对症状记录的平均敏感性为16%(每种症状为40%),平均特异性为98%。当患者为女性,估计肾小球滤过率为30 mL/min/1.73 m2,或有心血管病史时,对症状记录的敏感性更高。女性或执业≤7年的肾病科医师的文献敏感性高于执业≤25年的。局限性EHR中的肾脏病医生文件可能不能准确地代表访问期间讨论的内容。结论肾科医生在电子病历中记录ckd相关症状的准确性较低。虽然认识到症状可能已经被评估,但没有记录在案,但在本研究中,正确识别患者症状的临床记录所占比例很低,这表明有机会使用工具来简化和标准化该患者群体的症状评估。本研究旨在描述肾病学家在患者报告的与慢性肾脏疾病相关的症状时记录的准确性。患者在2家普通肾脏科诊所就诊前填写了一份关于其症状的电子问卷,并将其回答与肾脏科医生的电子健康记录进行了比较。我们发现,尽管与慢性肾脏疾病相关的某些症状的患病率高于50%,但肾脏科医生正确识别症状存在的比例平均为16%。我们认为,这表明患者和肾病专家之间关于症状的沟通可能存在差距,并相信常规肾病护理中标准化症状评估的工具可能有助于弥合这一差距。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Patient-Reported Symptoms Compared With Nephrologist Documentation During Outpatient Visits: A Retrospective Patient-Reported Outcome Measures Study

Rationale & Objective

Communication of symptom presence between patients and nephrologists is a key step toward management of the symptom burden faced by many patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD), but whether symptoms are being routinely discussed during ambulatory non-dialysis nephrology encounters is uncertain. This study compared patient reports of 11 CKD-related symptoms with nephrologists’ documentation of symptom presence in the concomitant visit note.

Study Design

A retrospective analysis of patient-reported outcome measures and nephrologist documentation in the electronic health record (EHR).

Setting & Study Populations

Adults treated at 2 ambulatory nephrology practices within a single tertiary academic center in the United States from 2015 to 2020.

Data Extraction

Patients reported symptoms using the Kidney Disease Quality of Life Short Form (KDQOL-SF) instrument before clinic visits. Symptoms were identified in the EHR-based note by natural language processing with subsequent manual identification of the context.

Analytical Approach

Sensitivity and specificity of nephrologist documentation for symptoms were calculated using KDQOL responses as the reference standard and stratified by numerous patient, nephrologist, and encounter characteristics.

Results

Over 4 years, 1,534 patients completed 2,118 KDQOL surveys before visits with 45 nephrologists. Average sensitivity of nephrologist documentation for symptoms was 16% (and <40% for each individual symptom), with an average specificity of 98%. Sensitivity of documentation for symptoms was higher when the patient was female, had an estimated glomerular filtration rate of <30 mL/min/1.73 m2, or had a history of cardiovascular disease. The documentation sensitivity of nephrologists was higher if they were female or were in practice for ≤7 years as compared with >25 years.

Limitations

Nephrologist documentation in the EHR may not accurately represent what was discussed during a visit.

Conclusions

Accuracy of nephrologist documentation for the presence of CKD-related symptoms in the EHR is low. Although recognizing that symptoms may have been assessed but not documented, the low proportion of clinic notes correctly identifying patient symptoms in this study suggests an opportunity for tools to streamline and standardize symptom assessment in this patient population.

Plain Language Summary

This study aimed to characterize how accurate the documentation of nephrologists is when it comes to patient-reported symptoms commonly associated with chronic kidney disease. Patients completed an electronic questionnaire regarding their symptoms before visits at 2 general nephrology clinics, and the responses were compared with documentation in the electronic health record by their nephrologists. We found that despite a prevalence higher than 50% for some symptoms related to chronic kidney disease, the proportion of nephrologist notes correctly identifying symptom presence averaged 16%. We believe this suggests a likely gap in communication between patients and nephrologists regarding symptoms and believe that tools for standardizing symptom assessment in routine nephrology care may help bridge this gap.
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
Kidney Medicine
Kidney Medicine Medicine-Internal Medicine
CiteScore
4.80
自引率
5.10%
发文量
176
审稿时长
12 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:604180095
Book学术官方微信