Dillon Ellis, Chuang Judith, Gupta Atul, Tapper Sharon, Lai Steve, Yu Peter, Ritchie Christine, Tai-Seale Ming
1 Palo Alto Medical Foundation Research Institute, Mountain View, CA, USA.
2 Department of Economics, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA.
Am J Hosp Palliat Care. 2017 Dec;34(10):918-924. doi: 10.1177/1049909117693578. Epub 2017 Feb 15.
Advance care planning (ACP) is valued by patients and clinicians, yet documenting ACP in an accessible manner is problematic.
In order to understand how providers incorporate electronic health record (EHR) ACP documentation into clinical practice, we interviewed providers in primary care and specialty departments about ACP practices (n = 13) and analyzed EHR data on 358 primary care providers (PCPs) and 79 specialists at a large multispecialty group practice.
Structured interviews were conducted with 13 providers with high and low rates of ACP documentation in primary care, oncology, pulmonology, and cardiology departments. The EHR problem list data on Advance Health Care Directives (AHCDs) and Physician Orders for Life-Sustaining Treatment (POLST) were used to calculate ACP documentation rates.
Examining seriously ill patients ≥65 years with no preexisting ACP documentation seen by providers during 2013 to 2014, 88.6% (AHCD) and 91.1% (POLST) of 79 specialists had zero ACP documentations. Of 358 PCPs, 29.1% (AHCD) and 62.3% (POLST) had zero ACP documentations. Interviewed PCPs often believed ACP documentation was beneficial and accessible, while specialists more often did not. Specialists expressed more confusion about documenting ACP, whereas PCPs reported standard clinic workflows. Problems with interoperability between outpatient and inpatient EHR systems and lack of consensus about who should document ACP were sources of variations in practices.
Results suggest that providers desire standardized workflows for ACP discussion and documentation. New Medicare reimbursement for ACP and an increasing number of quality metrics for ACP are incentives for health-care systems to address barriers to ACP documentation.
预先护理计划(ACP)受到患者和临床医生的重视,但以一种易于获取的方式记录ACP存在问题。
为了了解医疗服务提供者如何将电子健康记录(EHR)中的ACP文档纳入临床实践,我们采访了初级保健和专科部门的医疗服务提供者,了解他们的ACP实践情况(n = 13),并分析了一家大型多专科集团诊所中358名初级保健医生(PCP)和79名专科医生的EHR数据。
对初级保健、肿瘤学、肺病学和心脏病学部门中ACP文档记录率高和低的13名医疗服务提供者进行了结构化访谈。使用EHR中关于预先医疗护理指示(AHCD)和维持生命治疗的医生医嘱(POLST)的问题列表数据来计算ACP文档记录率。
在2013年至2014年期间,对79名专科医生诊治的≥65岁且之前没有ACP文档记录的重症患者进行检查发现,88.6%(AHCD)和91.1%(POLST)的专科医生没有ACP文档记录。在358名初级保健医生中,29.1%(AHCD)和62.3%(POLST)没有ACP文档记录。接受采访的初级保健医生通常认为ACP文档记录有益且易于获取,而专科医生则更多地持否定态度。专科医生对记录ACP表示更多困惑,而初级保健医生报告了标准的临床工作流程。门诊和住院EHR系统之间的互操作性问题以及关于谁应该记录ACP缺乏共识是实践差异的来源。
结果表明,医疗服务提供者希望有标准化的工作流程来进行ACP讨论和记录。新的医疗保险对ACP的报销以及越来越多的ACP质量指标是医疗保健系统解决ACP文档记录障碍的激励措施。