Suppr超能文献

电子健康记录中的吸烟史与自我报告的比较。

A Comparison of Smoking History in the Electronic Health Record With Self-Report.

机构信息

Department of Internal Medicine, Wake Forest School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, North Carolina.

Section of General Internal Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, Wake Forest School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, North Carolina.

出版信息

Am J Prev Med. 2020 Apr;58(4):591-595. doi: 10.1016/j.amepre.2019.10.020. Epub 2020 Jan 23.

Abstract

INTRODUCTION

Knowing patients' smoking history helps guide who may benefit from preventive services such as lung cancer screening. The accuracy of smoking history electronic health records remains unclear.

METHODS

This was a secondary analysis of data collected from a portal-based lung cancer screening decision aid. Participants of an academically affiliated health system, aged 55-76 years, completed an online survey that collected a detailed smoking history including years of smoking, years since quitting, and smoking intensity. Eligibility for lung cancer screening was defined using the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services criteria. Data analysis was performed May-December 2018, and data collection occurred between November 2016 and February 2017.

RESULTS

A total of 336 participants completed the survey and were included in the analysis. Of 175 participants with self-reported smoking intensity, 72% had packs per day and 62% had pack-years recorded in the electronic health record. When present, smoking history in the electronic health records correlated well with self-reported years of smoking (r =0.78, p≤0.0001) and years since quitting (r =0.94, p≤0.0001). Self-reported smoking intensity, including pack-years (r =0.62, p<0.0001) and packs per day (r =0.65, p≤0.0001), was less correlated. Of those participants eligible for lung cancer screening by self-report, only 35% met criteria for screening by electronic health records data alone. Others were either incorrectly classified as ineligible (23%) or had incomplete data (41%).

CONCLUSIONS

The electronic health records frequently misses critical elements of a smoking history, and when present, it often underestimates smoking intensity, which may impact who receives lung cancer screening.

摘要

简介

了解患者的吸烟史有助于指导哪些人可能受益于肺癌筛查等预防服务。电子健康记录中吸烟史的准确性仍不清楚。

方法

这是一项基于门户的肺癌筛查决策辅助工具收集数据的二次分析。一项学术附属医疗系统的参与者,年龄在 55-76 岁之间,完成了一项在线调查,该调查收集了详细的吸烟史,包括吸烟年限、戒烟年限和吸烟强度。肺癌筛查的资格是根据医疗保险和医疗补助服务中心的标准定义的。数据分析于 2018 年 5 月至 12 月进行,数据收集于 2016 年 11 月至 2017 年 2 月进行。

结果

共有 336 名参与者完成了调查并纳入分析。在 175 名有自我报告吸烟强度的参与者中,72%的人在电子健康记录中有每天的包数,62%的人有吸烟年数记录。当电子健康记录中存在吸烟史时,它与自我报告的吸烟年限(r =0.78,p≤0.0001)和戒烟年限(r =0.94,p≤0.0001)相关性良好。自我报告的吸烟强度,包括吸烟年数(r =0.62,p<0.0001)和每天的包数(r =0.65,p≤0.0001),相关性较低。在那些根据自我报告符合肺癌筛查条件的参与者中,只有 35%的人仅根据电子健康记录数据符合筛查标准。其他人要么被错误地归类为不合格(23%),要么数据不完整(41%)。

结论

电子健康记录经常遗漏吸烟史的关键要素,而且即使存在,它也经常低估吸烟强度,这可能会影响谁接受肺癌筛查。

相似文献

3
Prediction of Lung Cancer Screening Eligibility Using Simplified Criteria.简化标准预测肺癌筛查资格。
Ann Am Thorac Soc. 2019 Oct;16(10):1280-1285. doi: 10.1513/AnnalsATS.201903-239OC.
8
Evaluating efficacy of current lung cancer screening guidelines.评估现行肺癌筛查指南的有效性。
J Med Screen. 2017 Dec;24(4):208-213. doi: 10.1177/0969141316689111. Epub 2017 Feb 15.

引用本文的文献

7
Factors associated with lung cancer risk factor documentation.与肺癌风险因素记录相关的因素。
Am J Manag Care. 2023 Sep 1;29(9):439-447. doi: 10.37765/ajmc.2023.89354. Epub 2023 May 1.
10
Reply to Wilson: Risk-Stratifying Pulmonary Nodules.
Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2021 Jan 1;203(1):150. doi: 10.1164/rccm.202008-3370LE.

本文引用的文献

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验