Literature DB >> 10131461

Incompleteness and retrieval of case notes in a case note audit of colorectal cancer.

N Vickers1, A Pollock.   

Abstract

Hospital case notes are a crucial source of data but are subject to two major biases: incompleteness of data and non-retrieval. To assess these biases in relation to colorectal cancer a study was performed of all cases of colorectal cancer listed in the Thames cancer registry in patients resident in one of four districts in South Thames regions with a diagnosis in 1988. Five medical record sites were involved. Retrieval rate for all case notes for districts combined was 80%. In two districts the rates were too high for further investigation; in the other two respectively patient survival and whether treatment was given were positively associated with retrieval. Among the four districts incompleteness of notes ranged from 38% to 62% for staging, 8% to 40% for treatment, and 70% to 25% for diagnostic tests. Information about treatment was missing in 3% to 20%; survival data were omitted in less than 5%. In all districts completeness of case notes was inadequate and in some non-retrieval compounded the problem. Missing data reduce the quality of cancer registry data and potentially undermine interpretation of epidemiological studies and evaluation of care. Further research is warranted into the standards and resourcing of medical records departments and their effects on retrieval and data quality. Structured proformas could be applied across specialties to identify missing items in case notes, to identify areas where standards are required, or to audit notes where standards have already been agreed. A staging protocol to set standards for colorectal cancer has been adopted in one district, and a prospective audit is being established.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1993        PMID: 10131461      PMCID: PMC1055123          DOI: 10.1136/qshc.2.3.170

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Qual Health Care        ISSN: 0963-8172


  6 in total

1.  Hospital case notes and medical audit: evaluation of non-response.

Authors:  M C Gulliford; A Petruckevitch; P G Burney
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1991-05-11

2.  Lessons from preliminary evaluation of a year's medical audit.

Authors:  G S Rai
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1990-10-13

3.  Hospital case notes and medical audit.

Authors:  K C Krarup; A C Lamont
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1991-06-29

Review 4.  Random review of hospital patient records.

Authors:  D A Heath
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1990-03-10

5.  What did audit achieve? Lessons from preliminary evaluation of a year's medical audit.

Authors:  J Gabbay; M C McNicol; J Spiby; S C Davies; A J Layton
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1990-09-15

6.  Medical audit of case notes on one to one basis.

Authors:  G S Rai; E McInnes; V Phongsathorn; D E Sharland
Journal:  J R Coll Physicians Lond       Date:  1991-10
  6 in total
  12 in total

1.  Mortality league tables: do they inform or mislead?

Authors:  M McKee; D Hunter
Journal:  Qual Health Care       Date:  1995-03

2.  Preprinted assessment sheet.

Authors:  K M Srivatsa
Journal:  Qual Health Care       Date:  1996-06

3.  Medication errors during hospital drug rounds.

Authors:  M Wilcock
Journal:  Qual Health Care       Date:  1996-06

4.  The reliability of cancer registry records.

Authors:  M Gulliford
Journal:  Qual Health Care       Date:  1996-06

5.  Reliability of data of the Thames cancer registry on 673 cases of colorectal cancer: effect of the registration process.

Authors:  A M Pollock; N Vickers
Journal:  Qual Health Care       Date:  1995-09

6.  Future of cancer registries.

Authors:  N James; G Lawrence
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1994-12-03

7.  The future of cancer registries.

Authors:  A Pollock
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1994-10-01

8.  Concordance on the recording of cancer in the Saskatchewan Cancer Agency Registry, hospital charts and death registrations.

Authors:  N S Rawson; D L Robson
Journal:  Can J Public Health       Date:  2000 Sep-Oct

9.  A survey of consultants treating upper aerodigestive tract cancer in the UK.

Authors:  D M Edwards; N W Johnson; D Cooper; K A Warnakulasuriya
Journal:  Ann R Coll Surg Engl       Date:  1998-07       Impact factor: 1.891

10.  Why are a quarter of all cancer deaths in south-east England registered by death certificate only? Factors related to death certificate only registrations in the Thames Cancer Registry between 1987 and 1989.

Authors:  A M Pollock; N Vickers
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  1995-03       Impact factor: 7.640

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.