Literature DB >> 11853204

Comparison of 2 systems for clinical practice profiling in diabetic care: medical records versus claims and administrative data.

J Ross Maclean1, Donna M Fick, Wayne K Hoffman, Coleman T King, Eric R Lough, Jennifer L Waller.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To (1) describe the rate of glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c) testing and control in a primary care clinic at an academic medical center; (2) compare academic medical center and health maintenance organization (HMO) data for a subgroup of the same patients; and (3) discuss the challenges to accurate clinical practice profiling. STUDY
DESIGN: Retrospective analysis of medical records and claims and administrative data. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We reviewed the medical records of 300 patients with diabetes mellitus from the Primary Care practice at an academic medical center (AMC). The HMO and AMC were in the southeastern United States. The study adhered to the National Committee for Quality Assurance's Health Plan Employer Data and Information Set 3.0 (1998) guidelines for collection of the numerator and denominator data.
RESULTS: Overall, 275 (91.7%) of 300 patients underwent a documented HbA1c test (range, 77.8%-98.0% across the 5 Primary Care Associates clinic physicians). Of these 275 patients, 206 (74.9%; range, 52.4%-84.7%) were under "good control" (defined by the National Committee for Quality Assurance as an HbA1c level of < or = 9.5%). The mean (SD) HbA1c level was 8.45% (1.98%). Data from the HMO documented a rate of HbA1c testing of 36.3% (45/124) compared with 92.7% (115/124) based on case note review at the academic medical center.
CONCLUSIONS: Current administrative and claims-based information systems have inherent weaknesses if used for performance measurement. Reliance solely on medical record review is time and cost prohibitive. To ensure complete reporting of mandated "quality measures" will necessitate the tracking of data across different healthcare systems.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2002        PMID: 11853204

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Manag Care        ISSN: 1088-0224            Impact factor:   2.229


  5 in total

1.  Utilization and outcomes of HbA1c testing: a population-based study.

Authors:  Graham Woodward; Carl van Walraven; Janet E Hux
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  2006-01-31       Impact factor: 8.262

2.  Comparison of Electronic Health Record-Based and Claims-Based Diabetes Care Quality Measures: Causes of Discrepancies.

Authors:  Michael Barton Laws; Joanne Michaud; Renee Shield; William McQuade; Ira B Wilson
Journal:  Health Serv Res       Date:  2017-12-28       Impact factor: 3.402

3.  Impact of provider continuity on quality of care for persons with diabetes mellitus.

Authors:  James M Gill; Arch G Mainous; James J Diamond; M James Lenhard
Journal:  Ann Fam Med       Date:  2003 Sep-Oct       Impact factor: 5.166

4.  Quality of Care for Patients with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus in Dubai: A HEDIS-Like Assessment.

Authors:  Shelagh M Szabo; Katherine M Osenenko; Lara Qatami; Bonnie M Korenblat Donato; Ellen E Korol; Abdulrazzaq A Al Madani; Fatheya F Al Awadi; Jaber Al-Ansari; Ross Maclean; Adrian R Levy
Journal:  Int J Endocrinol       Date:  2015-05-24       Impact factor: 3.257

5.  Estimating the population prevalence of diagnosed and undiagnosed diabetes.

Authors:  Aaron Leong; Kaberi Dasgupta; Jean-Louis Chiasson; Elham Rahme
Journal:  Diabetes Care       Date:  2013-05-08       Impact factor: 19.112

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.