• 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

利用电子健康记录建立多中心研究数据库的可行性:PURSUIT 网络。

Feasibility of establishing a multi-center research database using the electronic health record: The PURSUIT network.

机构信息

Pediatric Urology Research Enterprise, Department of Pediatric Urology, Children's Hospital Colorado, Aurora, CO, USA; Division of Urology, Department of Surgery, University of Colorado Denver Anschutz Medical Campus, Aurora, CO, USA; Adult and Child Center for Health Outcomes Research and Delivery Science, University of Colorado Denver Anschutz Medical Campus, Aurora, CO, USA.

Department of Pediatric Urology, Texas Children's Hospital, Houston, TX, USA; Department of Urology, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX, USA.

出版信息

J Pediatr Urol. 2022 Dec;18(6):788.e1-788.e8. doi: 10.1016/j.jpurol.2022.05.004. Epub 2022 May 13.

DOI:10.1016/j.jpurol.2022.05.004
PMID:35644792
Abstract

BACKGROUND

Although multi-center research is needed in pediatric urology, collaboration is impeded by differences in physician documentation and research resources. Electronic health record (EHR) tools offer a promising avenue to overcome these barriers.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the accuracy, completeness, and utilization of structured data elements across multiple practices.

STUDY DESIGN

A standardized template was developed and implemented at five academic pediatric urology practices to document clinic visits for patients with congenital hydronephrosis and/or vesicoureteral reflux. Data from standardized elements in the template and from pre-existing EHR fields were extracted into a secure database. A 20% random sample of infants with data from structured elements from 1/1/2020 and 4/30/2021 were identified and compared to manual chart review at sites with >100 charts; all other sites reviewed at least 20 charts. Manual chart review was standardized across sites and included: clinic and operative notes, orders linked to the clinic encounter, radiology results, and active medications. Accuracy of data extraction was evaluated by computing the kappa statistic and percentage agreement. For sites that had adopted the templates prior to 6/1/2019 (early adopters), a list of eligible patients with an initial clinic visit from 1/1/2020-7/27/2020 was generated using standardized reporting techniques and confirmed by manual chart review. Physician utilization of the template was then calculated by comparing patients with data obtained from the note template to the generated list of eligible patients.

RESULTS

230 patient records met study criteria. Agreement between manual chart review and data extracted from the EHR was high (>85%). Race, ethnicity and insurance data were misclassified in about 10-15% of cases; this was due to site-specific differences in how these fields were coded. Renal ultrasound was misclassified 12% of the time; this was primarily due to outside images documented in radiology results but not included in the clinical note. All other data elements had >90% agreement (Figure). Template utilization for early adopters was >75% (75.5-87.5%).

DISCUSSION

This is the first study in urology to demonstrate that use of structured data elements can support multi-center research. Limitations include: inclusion of only academic sites with the Epic EHR and lack of data on utilization and sustainability at sites without a prior history of structured template use.

CONCLUSIONS

Multi-center research collaboration using EHR-based data collection tools is feasible with generally high accuracy compared to manual chart review. Additionally, sites with a long history of template adoption have high levels of provider utilization.

摘要

背景

尽管小儿泌尿科需要进行多中心研究,但由于医生记录和研究资源的差异,合作受到阻碍。电子健康记录 (EHR) 工具提供了克服这些障碍的有前途的途径。

目的

评估多个实践中结构化数据元素的准确性、完整性和利用率。

研究设计

在五个学术小儿泌尿科实践中制定并实施了标准化模板,以记录患有先天性肾积水和/或膀胱输尿管反流的患者的就诊情况。从模板中的标准化元素和预先存在的 EHR 字段中提取的数据被提取到一个安全的数据库中。从 2020 年 1 月 1 日至 2021 年 4 月 30 日有结构化元素数据的婴儿中随机抽取 20%,并与>100 份图表的站点的手动图表审查进行比较;其他所有站点至少审查了 20 份图表。站点之间的手动图表审查是标准化的,包括:诊所和手术记录、与诊所就诊相关的医嘱、放射学结果和正在使用的药物。通过计算 Kappa 统计量和百分比一致性来评估数据提取的准确性。对于在 2019 年 6 月 1 日之前采用模板的站点(早期采用者),使用标准化报告技术生成一份 2020 年 1 月 1 日至 7 月 27 日首次就诊的合格患者清单,并通过手动图表审查进行确认。然后通过将从笔记模板中获得的数据与生成的合格患者清单进行比较,计算医生对模板的利用率。

结果

符合研究标准的患者记录有 230 条。手动图表审查与从 EHR 中提取的数据之间的一致性很高(>85%)。种族、民族和保险数据的分类错误约为 10-15%;这是由于站点在如何编码这些字段方面存在特定差异。肾脏超声的分类错误率为 12%;这主要是由于放射学结果中记录的外部图像,但未包含在临床记录中。所有其他数据元素的一致性均>90%(图)。早期采用者的模板利用率>75%(75.5-87.5%)。

讨论

这是泌尿科中第一个证明使用结构化数据元素可以支持多中心研究的研究。局限性包括:仅包括使用 Epic EHR 的学术站点,以及缺乏在没有结构化模板使用前期历史的站点上的数据关于利用率和可持续性。

结论

使用基于 EHR 的数据收集工具进行多中心研究合作是可行的,与手动图表审查相比,其准确性通常较高。此外,长期采用模板的站点具有较高的提供者利用率。

相似文献

1
Feasibility of establishing a multi-center research database using the electronic health record: The PURSUIT network.利用电子健康记录建立多中心研究数据库的可行性:PURSUIT 网络。
J Pediatr Urol. 2022 Dec;18(6):788.e1-788.e8. doi: 10.1016/j.jpurol.2022.05.004. Epub 2022 May 13.
2
Folic acid supplementation and malaria susceptibility and severity among people taking antifolate antimalarial drugs in endemic areas.在流行地区,服用抗叶酸抗疟药物的人群中,叶酸补充剂与疟疾易感性和严重程度的关系。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2022 Feb 1;2(2022):CD014217. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD014217.
3
Feasibility of integrating research data collection into routine clinical practice using the electronic health record.利用电子健康记录将研究数据收集整合到常规临床实践中的可行性。
J Urol. 2014 Oct;192(4):1215-20. doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2014.04.091. Epub 2014 Apr 30.
4
Effect of an Electronic Health Record-Based Intervention on Documentation Practices.基于电子健康记录的干预措施对文档记录实践的影响。
Appl Clin Inform. 2024 Aug;15(4):771-777. doi: 10.1055/a-2367-8564. Epub 2024 Jul 17.
5
Physician productivity and the ambulatory EHR in a large academic multi-specialty physician group.在一个大型学术多专科医师集团中,医生的生产力和门诊电子病历。
Int J Med Inform. 2010 Jul;79(7):492-500. doi: 10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2010.04.006. Epub 2010 May 15.
6
Standardization of Emergency Department Clinical Note Templates: A Retrospective Analysis across an Integrated Health System.急诊科临床记录模板的标准化:跨综合卫生系统的回顾性分析
Appl Clin Inform. 2024 Mar;15(2):397-403. doi: 10.1055/a-2301-7496. Epub 2024 Apr 8.
7
Rapid Development of Specialty Population Registries and Quality Measures from Electronic Health Record Data*. An Agile Framework.利用电子健康记录数据快速开发专科人群登记册和质量指标*。一个敏捷框架。
Methods Inf Med. 2017 Jun 14;56(99):e74-e83. doi: 10.3414/ME16-02-0031.
8
Documentation and coding of ED patient encounters: an evaluation of the accuracy of an electronic medical record.急诊患者诊疗记录与编码:电子病历准确性评估
Am J Emerg Med. 2006 Oct;24(6):664-78. doi: 10.1016/j.ajem.2006.02.005.
9
Physician EHR Time and Visit Volume Following Adoption of Team-Based Documentation Support.医生采用基于团队的文档支持后的电子健康记录时间和就诊量。
JAMA Intern Med. 2024 Oct 1;184(10):1212-1221. doi: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2024.4123.
10
The role of organizations in shaping physician use of electronic health records.组织在塑造医生使用电子健康记录方面的作用。
Health Serv Res. 2024 Feb;59(1):e14203. doi: 10.1111/1475-6773.14203. Epub 2023 Jul 12.

引用本文的文献

1
Use of Epic Electronic Health Record System for Health Care Research: Scoping Review.利用 Epic 电子健康记录系统进行医疗保健研究:范围综述。
J Med Internet Res. 2023 Dec 15;25:e51003. doi: 10.2196/51003.