• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

电子健康记录报告在识别糖尿病控制不佳患者检测延迟中的应用。

Utility of an Electronic Health Record Report to Identify Patients with Delays in Testing for Poorly Controlled Diabetes.

出版信息

Jt Comm J Qual Patient Saf. 2022 Jun-Jul;48(6-7):335-342. doi: 10.1016/j.jcjq.2022.03.002. Epub 2022 Apr 2.

DOI:10.1016/j.jcjq.2022.03.002
PMID:35595653
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9216238/
Abstract

BACKGROUND

Reducing hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) is essential for patients with poorly controlled diabetes. However, delays in HbA1c testing are common, and incomplete electronic health record (EHR) reports hinder identification of patients who are overdue. This study sought to quantify how often an EHR report correctly identifies patients with HbA1c testing delays and to describe potential contributing factors.

METHODS

Using an EHR report, the researchers identified adult patients who had an HbA1c > 9.0% between October 2017 and March 2018 and a suspected delay (for example, another HbA1c had not resulted within six months). A retrospective chart review of 200 randomly selected records was performed to confirm delays in testing. Secondary measures were collected from 93 charts to evaluate associated factors.

RESULTS

A total of 685 patients with suspected delays were identified. On chart review (N = 200), 82.0% were confirmed. Nine percent of patients had a timely repeat result, but the result was not in a discrete field within the EHR. Another 8.5% were never expected to return. Among a subset of confirmed delays, patients often received lifestyle counseling, but less than half had documented discussions about repeat glycemic testing. Also, 74.2% had a timely follow-up appointment scheduled but the majority (85.5%) were missed.

CONCLUSION

Most suspected delays in HbA1c testing were confirmed; however, a substantial minority were misclassified due to missing data or follow-up care outside the health system. Current solutions to improve data quality for HbA1c are labor intensive and highlight the need for better integration of health care data. Missed appointments were commonly noted among patients with delays in care and are a potential target for improvement.

摘要

背景

对于血糖控制不佳的糖尿病患者,降低血红蛋白 A1c(HbA1c)至关重要。然而,HbA1c 检测常会出现延迟,且电子健康记录(EHR)报告不完整会阻碍识别出需要复查的患者。本研究旨在量化 EHR 报告正确识别 HbA1c 检测延迟患者的频率,并描述潜在的促成因素。

方法

研究人员使用 EHR 报告,识别出 2017 年 10 月至 2018 年 3 月间 HbA1c>9.0%且疑似存在检测延迟(例如,HbA1c 结果在六个月内尚未得出)的成年患者。对 200 份随机选定记录进行回顾性病历审查,以确认检测是否延迟。还从 93 份病历中收集次要指标,以评估相关因素。

结果

共确定了 685 例疑似延迟的患者。在病历审查(n=200)中,82.0%得到了确认。9%的患者有及时的重复结果,但该结果未在 EHR 的离散字段中。另有 8.5%的患者从未预期会返回。在一组确认的延迟患者中,患者经常接受生活方式咨询,但不到一半的患者有关于重复血糖检测的记录。此外,74.2%的患者有及时的随访预约,但大多数(85.5%)都错过了。

结论

大多数疑似 HbA1c 检测延迟的情况得到了确认;然而,由于数据缺失或医疗系统外的后续护理,少数情况被错误分类。目前,提高 HbA1c 数据质量的解决方案需要大量人力,突出了更好地整合医疗保健数据的必要性。在延迟治疗的患者中经常出现错过预约的情况,这是一个潜在的改进目标。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/40c2/9216238/8397d7202773/nihms-1794986-f0001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/40c2/9216238/8397d7202773/nihms-1794986-f0001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/40c2/9216238/8397d7202773/nihms-1794986-f0001.jpg

相似文献

1
Utility of an Electronic Health Record Report to Identify Patients with Delays in Testing for Poorly Controlled Diabetes.电子健康记录报告在识别糖尿病控制不佳患者检测延迟中的应用。
Jt Comm J Qual Patient Saf. 2022 Jun-Jul;48(6-7):335-342. doi: 10.1016/j.jcjq.2022.03.002. Epub 2022 Apr 2.
2
Adult patient access to electronic health records.成年患者获取电子健康记录。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2021 Feb 26;2(2):CD012707. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD012707.pub2.
3
4
The Use of Mobile Personal Health Records for Hemoglobin A1c Regulation in Patients With Diabetes: Retrospective Observational Study.移动个人健康记录在糖尿病患者糖化血红蛋白调控中的应用:回顾性观察研究
J Med Internet Res. 2020 Jun 2;22(6):e15372. doi: 10.2196/15372.
5
Missed appointments and poor glycemic control: an opportunity to identify high-risk diabetic patients.预约失约与血糖控制不佳:识别糖尿病高危患者的契机。
Med Care. 2004 Feb;42(2):110-5. doi: 10.1097/01.mlr.0000109023.64650.73.
6
Variation between Point-of-care and Laboratory HbA1c testing in Clinical Practice.临床实践中即时检测与实验室糖化血红蛋白(HbA1c)检测之间的差异。
P R Health Sci J. 2019 Sep;38(3):189-191.
7
Temporal trends of hemoglobin A1c testing.糖化血红蛋白检测的时间趋势。
J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2014 Nov-Dec;21(6):1038-44. doi: 10.1136/amiajnl-2013-002592. Epub 2014 Jun 13.
8
Diabetes INSIDE: Improving Population HbA Testing and Targets in Primary Care With a Quality Initiative.《糖尿病内参》:通过一项质量计划提高初级保健中人群的 HbA 检测和目标值。
Diabetes Care. 2020 Feb;43(2):329-336. doi: 10.2337/dc19-0454. Epub 2019 Dec 3.
9
Glycated Hemoglobin (HbA1c) Concentrations Among Children and Adolescents With Diabetes in Middle- and Low-Income Countries, 2010-2019: A Retrospective Chart Review and Systematic Review of Literature.2010-2019 年中低收入国家儿童和青少年糖尿病患者糖化血红蛋白(HbA1c)浓度:回顾性图表分析和文献系统评价。
Front Endocrinol (Lausanne). 2021 Apr 12;12:651589. doi: 10.3389/fendo.2021.651589. eCollection 2021.
10
The adoption of an electronic health record did not improve A1c values in Type 2 diabetes.采用电子健康记录并未改善2型糖尿病患者的糖化血红蛋白(A1c)值。
J Innov Health Inform. 2016 Apr 15;23(1):144. doi: 10.14236/jhi.v23i1.144.

本文引用的文献

1
Clinical data sharing improves quality measurement and patient safety.临床数据共享可提高质量测量和患者安全性。
J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2021 Jul 14;28(7):1534-1542. doi: 10.1093/jamia/ocab039.
2
6. Glycemic Targets: .6. 血糖目标: 。
Diabetes Care. 2021 Jan;44(Suppl 1):S73-S84. doi: 10.2337/dc21-S006.
3
Moving from Quality Measurement to Quality Improvement: Applying Meaningful Use Lessons to the Quality Payment Program.从质量测量到质量改进:将有意义使用的经验教训应用于质量支付计划。
Perspect Health Inf Manag. 2019 Oct 1;16(Fall):1b. eCollection 2019 Fall.
4
Using Electronic Health Records to Measure Quality Improvement Efforts: Findings from a Large Practice Facilitation Initiative.利用电子健康记录衡量质量改进工作:一项大型实践促进计划的结果
Jt Comm J Qual Patient Saf. 2020 Jan;46(1):11-17. doi: 10.1016/j.jcjq.2019.09.006. Epub 2019 Nov 5.
5
Logical Observation Identifiers Names and Codes for Laboratorians.逻辑观察标识符命名与检验规范
Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2020 Feb;144(2):229-239. doi: 10.5858/arpa.2018-0477-RA. Epub 2019 Jun 20.
6
Enhanced Quality Measurement Event Detection: An Application to Physician Reporting.增强型质量测量事件检测:在医生报告中的应用
EGEMS (Wash DC). 2017 May 30;5(1):5. doi: 10.13063/2327-9214.1270.
7
Time Out - Charting a Path for Improving Performance Measurement.暂停——规划提高绩效评估的路径
N Engl J Med. 2018 May 10;378(19):1757-1761. doi: 10.1056/NEJMp1802595. Epub 2018 Apr 18.
8
Primary Care Practices' Abilities And Challenges In Using Electronic Health Record Data For Quality Improvement.初级保健实践在利用电子健康记录数据进行质量改进方面的能力和挑战。
Health Aff (Millwood). 2018 Apr;37(4):635-643. doi: 10.1377/hlthaff.2017.1254.
9
Quantifying the Effect of Data Quality on the Validity of an eMeasure.量化数据质量对电子测量有效性的影响。
Appl Clin Inform. 2017 Oct;8(4):1012-1021. doi: 10.4338/ACI-2017-03-RA-0042. Epub 2017 Dec 14.
10
Seven years after Meaningful Use: Physicians' and nurses' experiences with electronic health records.有意义使用电子健康记录 7 年后:医生和护士的经验。
Health Care Manage Rev. 2019 Jan/Mar;44(1):30-40. doi: 10.1097/HMR.0000000000000168.