使用电子医疗记录识别手术后恢复增强的病例

Nikki L. B. Freeman, K. McGinigle, P. Leese
{"title":"使用电子医疗记录识别手术后恢复增强的病例","authors":"Nikki L. B. Freeman, K. McGinigle, P. Leese","doi":"10.5334/egems.304","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Context: Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) aims to improve surgical outcomes by integrating evidence-based practices across preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative care. Data in electronic medical records (EMRs) provide insight on how ERAS is implemented and its impact on surgical outcomes. Because ERAS is a multimodal pathway provided by multiple physicians and health care providers over time, identifying ERAS cases in EMRs is not a trivial task. To better understand how EMRs can be used to study ERAS, we describe our experience with using current methodologies and the development and rationale of a new method for retrospectively identifying ERAS cases in EMRs. Case Description: Using EMR data from surgical departments at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, we first identified ERAS cases using a protocol-based method, using basic information including the date of ERAS implementation, surgical procedure and date, and primary surgeon. We further examined two operational flags in the EMRs, a nursing order and a case request for OR order. Wide variation between the methods compelled us to consult with ERAS surgical staff and explore the EMRs to develop a more refined method for identifying ERAS cases. Method: We developed a two-step method, with the first step based on the protocol definition and the second step based on an ERAS-specific medication definition. To test our method, we randomly sampled 150 general, gynecological, and urologic surgeries performed between January 1, 2016 and March 30, 2017. Surgical cases were classified as ERAS or not using the protocol definition, nursing order, case request for OR order, and our two-step method. To assess the accuracy of each method, two independent reviewers assessed the charts to determine whether cases were ERAS. Findings: Of the 150 charts reviewed, 74 were ERAS cases. The protocol only method and nursing order flag performed similarly, correctly identifying 74 percent and 73 percent of true ERAS cases, respectively. The case request for OR order flag performed less well, correctly identifying only 44 percent of the true ERAS cases. Our two-step method performed well, correctly identifying 98 percent of true ERAS cases. Conclusion: ERAS pathways are complex, making study of them from EMRs difficult. Current strategies for doing so are relatively easy to implement, but unreliable. We have developed a reproducible and observable ERAS computational phenotype that identifies ERAS cases reliably. This is a step forward in using the richness of EMR data to study ERAS implementation, efficacy, and how they can contribute to surgical care improvement.","PeriodicalId":72880,"journal":{"name":"EGEMS (Washington, DC)","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-07-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Using Electronic Medical Records to Identify Enhanced Recovery After Surgery Cases\",\"authors\":\"Nikki L. B. Freeman, K. McGinigle, P. Leese\",\"doi\":\"10.5334/egems.304\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Context: Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) aims to improve surgical outcomes by integrating evidence-based practices across preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative care. Data in electronic medical records (EMRs) provide insight on how ERAS is implemented and its impact on surgical outcomes. Because ERAS is a multimodal pathway provided by multiple physicians and health care providers over time, identifying ERAS cases in EMRs is not a trivial task. To better understand how EMRs can be used to study ERAS, we describe our experience with using current methodologies and the development and rationale of a new method for retrospectively identifying ERAS cases in EMRs. Case Description: Using EMR data from surgical departments at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, we first identified ERAS cases using a protocol-based method, using basic information including the date of ERAS implementation, surgical procedure and date, and primary surgeon. We further examined two operational flags in the EMRs, a nursing order and a case request for OR order. Wide variation between the methods compelled us to consult with ERAS surgical staff and explore the EMRs to develop a more refined method for identifying ERAS cases. Method: We developed a two-step method, with the first step based on the protocol definition and the second step based on an ERAS-specific medication definition. To test our method, we randomly sampled 150 general, gynecological, and urologic surgeries performed between January 1, 2016 and March 30, 2017. Surgical cases were classified as ERAS or not using the protocol definition, nursing order, case request for OR order, and our two-step method. To assess the accuracy of each method, two independent reviewers assessed the charts to determine whether cases were ERAS. Findings: Of the 150 charts reviewed, 74 were ERAS cases. The protocol only method and nursing order flag performed similarly, correctly identifying 74 percent and 73 percent of true ERAS cases, respectively. The case request for OR order flag performed less well, correctly identifying only 44 percent of the true ERAS cases. Our two-step method performed well, correctly identifying 98 percent of true ERAS cases. Conclusion: ERAS pathways are complex, making study of them from EMRs difficult. Current strategies for doing so are relatively easy to implement, but unreliable. We have developed a reproducible and observable ERAS computational phenotype that identifies ERAS cases reliably. This is a step forward in using the richness of EMR data to study ERAS implementation, efficacy, and how they can contribute to surgical care improvement.\",\"PeriodicalId\":72880,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"EGEMS (Washington, DC)\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-07-26\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"EGEMS (Washington, DC)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5334/egems.304\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"EGEMS (Washington, DC)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5334/egems.304","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

背景:增强术后恢复(ERAS)旨在通过整合术前、术中和术后护理的循证实践来改善手术结果。电子医疗记录(EMR)中的数据可以深入了解ERAS的实施方式及其对手术结果的影响。由于ERAS是由多个医生和医疗保健提供者随着时间的推移提供的多模式途径,因此在电子病历中识别ERAS病例并非易事。为了更好地了解电子病历如何用于研究电子逆向拍卖,我们描述了我们使用当前方法的经验,以及回顾性识别电子病历中电子逆向拍卖病例的新方法的开发和原理。病例描述:使用北卡罗来纳大学教堂山分校外科的电子病历数据,我们首先使用基于方案的方法,使用包括ERAS实施日期、手术程序和日期以及主要外科医生在内的基本信息,确定了ERAS病例。我们进一步检查了电子病历中的两个操作标志,一个护理订单和一个OR订单的病例请求。方法之间的巨大差异迫使我们咨询ERAS手术人员,并探索电子病历,以开发一种更精细的方法来识别ERAS病例。方法:我们开发了一种两步方法,第一步基于方案定义,第二步基于ERAS特异性药物定义。为了测试我们的方法,我们随机抽取了2016年1月1日至2017年3月30日期间进行的150例普通外科、妇科和泌尿外科手术。使用方案定义、护理顺序、病例请求or顺序和我们的两步方法将手术病例分类为ERAS或未分类。为了评估每种方法的准确性,两名独立评审员对图表进行了评估,以确定病例是否为ERAS。调查结果:在审查的150张图表中,74张是ERAS病例。仅采用方案的方法和护理命令标志的效果相似,分别正确识别了74%和73%的真实ERAS病例。OR订单标志的案例请求表现不佳,仅正确识别了44%的真实ERAS案例。我们的两步方法表现良好,正确识别了98%的真实ERAS病例。结论:ERAS通路复杂,难以从电子病历中进行研究。目前这样做的策略相对容易实施,但不可靠。我们已经开发了一种可重复和可观察的ERAS计算表型,可以可靠地识别ERAS病例。这是利用丰富的电子病历数据来研究ERAS的实施、疗效以及它们如何有助于改善外科护理的一个进步。
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 Medical Records to Identify Enhanced Recovery After Surgery Cases
Context: Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) aims to improve surgical outcomes by integrating evidence-based practices across preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative care. Data in electronic medical records (EMRs) provide insight on how ERAS is implemented and its impact on surgical outcomes. Because ERAS is a multimodal pathway provided by multiple physicians and health care providers over time, identifying ERAS cases in EMRs is not a trivial task. To better understand how EMRs can be used to study ERAS, we describe our experience with using current methodologies and the development and rationale of a new method for retrospectively identifying ERAS cases in EMRs. Case Description: Using EMR data from surgical departments at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, we first identified ERAS cases using a protocol-based method, using basic information including the date of ERAS implementation, surgical procedure and date, and primary surgeon. We further examined two operational flags in the EMRs, a nursing order and a case request for OR order. Wide variation between the methods compelled us to consult with ERAS surgical staff and explore the EMRs to develop a more refined method for identifying ERAS cases. Method: We developed a two-step method, with the first step based on the protocol definition and the second step based on an ERAS-specific medication definition. To test our method, we randomly sampled 150 general, gynecological, and urologic surgeries performed between January 1, 2016 and March 30, 2017. Surgical cases were classified as ERAS or not using the protocol definition, nursing order, case request for OR order, and our two-step method. To assess the accuracy of each method, two independent reviewers assessed the charts to determine whether cases were ERAS. Findings: Of the 150 charts reviewed, 74 were ERAS cases. The protocol only method and nursing order flag performed similarly, correctly identifying 74 percent and 73 percent of true ERAS cases, respectively. The case request for OR order flag performed less well, correctly identifying only 44 percent of the true ERAS cases. Our two-step method performed well, correctly identifying 98 percent of true ERAS cases. Conclusion: ERAS pathways are complex, making study of them from EMRs difficult. Current strategies for doing so are relatively easy to implement, but unreliable. We have developed a reproducible and observable ERAS computational phenotype that identifies ERAS cases reliably. This is a step forward in using the richness of EMR data to study ERAS implementation, efficacy, and how they can contribute to surgical care improvement.
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
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信