Ebbers Tom, Takes Robert P, Honings Jimmie, Smeele Ludi E, Kool Rudolf B, van den Broek Guido B
Department of Otorhinolaryngology and Head and Neck Surgery, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Department of Head and Neck Oncology and Surgery, Antoni van Leeuwenhoek, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Digit Health. 2023 Jul 28;9:20552076231191007. doi: 10.1177/20552076231191007. eCollection 2023 Jan-Dec.
To describe the development and validation of automated electronic health record data reuse for a multidisciplinary quality dashboard.
Comparative study analyzing a manually extracted and an automatically extracted dataset with 262 patients treated for HNC cancer in a tertiary oncology center in the Netherlands in 2020. The primary outcome measures were the percentage of agreement on data elements required for calculating quality indicators and the difference between indicators results calculated using manually collected and indicators that used automatically extracted data.
The results of this study demonstrate high agreement between manual and automatically collected variables, reaching up to 99.0% agreement. However, some variables demonstrate lower levels of agreement, with one variable showing only a 20.0% agreement rate. The indicator results obtained through manual collection and automatic extraction show high agreement in most cases, with discrepancy rates ranging from 0.3% to 3.5%. One indicator is identified as a negative outlier, with a discrepancy rate of nearly 25%.
This study shows that it is possible to use routinely collected structured data to reliably measure the quality of care in real-time, which could render manual data collection for quality measurement obsolete. To achieve reliable data reuse, it is important that relevant data is recorded as structured data during the care process. Furthermore, the results also imply that data validation is conditional to development of a reliable dashboard.
描述用于多学科质量仪表盘的自动化电子健康记录数据再利用的开发与验证。
比较研究,分析了2020年在荷兰一家三级肿瘤中心接受头颈癌治疗的262例患者的手动提取数据集和自动提取数据集。主要结局指标是计算质量指标所需数据元素的一致率,以及使用手动收集数据计算的指标结果与使用自动提取数据计算的指标结果之间的差异。
本研究结果表明,手动收集和自动收集的变量之间具有高度一致性,一致率高达99.0%。然而,一些变量的一致性水平较低,其中一个变量的一致率仅为20.0%。通过手动收集和自动提取获得的指标结果在大多数情况下高度一致,差异率在0.3%至3.5%之间。有一个指标被确定为负异常值,差异率近25%。
本研究表明,可以使用常规收集的结构化数据实时可靠地衡量医疗质量,这可能使用于质量测量的手动数据收集过时。为实现可靠的数据再利用,在护理过程中将相关数据记录为结构化数据非常重要。此外,结果还表明数据验证是开发可靠仪表盘的条件。