Harding Catherine, Seal Alexa, Pilotto Louis, Mackey Ken, Duncan Geraldine, Huynh Ronald, McWilliam Robert, Blake Stephanie
The University of Notre Dame Australia School of Medicine, Sydney Rural Clinical School (Wagga Wagga).
University of New South Wales Faculty of Medicine - Rural Clinical School.
J Innov Health Inform. 2016 Sep 13;23(3):835. doi: 10.14236/jhi.v23i3.835.
Data extraction tools (DETs) are increasingly being used for research and audit of general practice, despite their limitations.Objective This study explores the accuracy of Pap smear rates obtained with a DET compared to that of the Pap smear rate obtained with a manual file audit.
A widely available DET was used to establish the rate of Pap smears in a large multi-general practice (multi-GP) in regional New South Wales followed by a manual audit of patient files. The main outcome measure was identification of possible discrepancies between the rates established.
The DET used significantly underestimated the level of cervical screening compared to the manual audit. In some instances, the patient file contained phone/specialist record of Pap smear conducted elsewhere, which accounted for the failure of the DET to detect some smears. Those patients who had Pap smears whose pathology codes differed between time intervals, i.e. from different pathology providers or from within the same provider but using a different code, were less likely to have had their most recent Pap smear detected by the DET (p < 0.001).
Data obtained from DETs should be used with caution as they may not accurately reflect the rate of Pap smears from electronic medical records.How this fits in DETs are increasingly being used for research and audit of general practice. This study explores the accuracy of Pap smear rates obtained with a DET compared to that of the Pap smear rate obtained with a manual file audit The DET tested significantly underestimated the level of cervical screening compared to manual screening. Data obtained from DETs should be used with caution as they may not accurately reflect the rate of Pap smears from electronic medical records.
尽管数据提取工具（DETs）存在局限性，但它们越来越多地被用于全科医疗的研究和审计。目的：本研究探讨了使用数据提取工具获得的巴氏涂片率与通过手工档案审计获得的巴氏涂片率相比的准确性。
使用一种广泛可用的数据提取工具来确定新南威尔士州地区一家大型多全科医疗诊所（多GP）的巴氏涂片率，随后对患者档案进行手工审计。主要结局指标是确定所确定的比率之间可能存在的差异。
与手工审计相比，所使用的数据提取工具显著低估了宫颈筛查水平。在某些情况下，患者档案包含在其他地方进行巴氏涂片检查的电话/专科记录，这导致数据提取工具未能检测到一些涂片。那些巴氏涂片的病理代码在不同时间间隔有所不同的患者，即来自不同病理提供者或来自同一提供者但使用不同代码的患者，其最近一次巴氏涂片被数据提取工具检测到的可能性较小（p<0.001）。
应谨慎使用从数据提取工具获得的数据，因为它们可能无法准确反映电子病历中的巴氏涂片率。这如何适用 数据提取工具越来越多地被用于全科医疗的研究和审计。本研究探讨了使用数据提取工具获得的巴氏涂片率与通过手工档案审计获得的巴氏涂片率相比的准确性。与手工筛查相比，所测试的数据提取工具显著低估了宫颈筛查水平。应谨慎使用从数据提取工具获得的数据，因为它们可能无法准确反映电子病历中的巴氏涂片率。
