eHealth Research Group, Centre for Population Health Sciences, The University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.
J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2014 May-Jun;21(3):492-500. doi: 10.1136/amiajnl-2013-001666. Epub 2013 Nov 1.
We aimed to explore stakeholder views, attitudes, needs, and expectations regarding likely benefits and risks resulting from increased structuring and coding of clinical information within electronic health records (EHRs).
Qualitative investigation in primary and secondary care and research settings throughout the UK. Data were derived from interviews, expert discussion groups, observations, and relevant documents. Participants (n=70) included patients, healthcare professionals, health service commissioners, policy makers, managers, administrators, systems developers, researchers, and academics.
Four main themes arose from our data: variations in documentation practice; patient care benefits; secondary uses of information; and informing and involving patients. We observed a lack of guidelines, co-ordination, and dissemination of best practice relating to the design and use of information structures. While we identified immediate benefits for direct care and secondary analysis, many healthcare professionals did not see the relevance of structured and/or coded data to clinical practice. The potential for structured information to increase patient understanding of their diagnosis and treatment contrasted with concerns regarding the appropriateness of coded information for patients.
The design and development of EHRs requires the capture of narrative information to reflect patient/clinician communication and computable data for administration and research purposes. Increased structuring and/or coding of EHRs therefore offers both benefits and risks. Documentation standards within clinical guidelines are likely to encourage comprehensive, accurate processing of data. As data structures may impact upon clinician/patient interactions, new models of documentation may be necessary if EHRs are to be read and authored by patients.
我们旨在探讨利益相关者对于电子健康记录(EHR)中临床信息的结构化和编码增加可能带来的益处和风险的看法、态度、需求和期望。
在英国的初级和二级保健及研究环境中进行定性研究。数据来源于访谈、专家讨论小组、观察和相关文件。参与者(n=70)包括患者、医疗保健专业人员、卫生服务专员、政策制定者、经理、行政人员、系统开发人员、研究人员和学者。
我们的数据产生了四个主要主题:文档记录实践的差异;患者护理益处;信息的二次利用;以及告知和参与患者。我们观察到在信息结构的设计和使用方面缺乏准则、协调和最佳实践的传播。虽然我们确定了直接护理和二次分析的即时益处,但许多医疗保健专业人员认为结构化和/或编码数据与临床实践无关。结构化信息有可能增加患者对其诊断和治疗的理解,但也存在对患者编码信息的适当性的担忧。
EHR 的设计和开发需要捕获反映患者/临床医生沟通的叙述性信息和用于管理和研究目的的可计算数据。因此,EHR 中结构化和/或编码的增加既带来益处,也带来风险。临床指南中的文档标准可能会鼓励全面、准确地处理数据。由于数据结构可能会影响临床医生/患者之间的互动,如果 EHR 要由患者阅读和撰写,可能需要新的文档模型。