Literature DB >> 17567226

Does concordance between data sources vary by medical organization type?

Diana M Tisnado1, John L Adams, Honghu Liu, Cheryl L Damberg, Ashlee Hu, Wen-Pin Chen, Katherine L Kahn.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Little is known about how concordance between patient self-report and medical record data varies with medical organization type. Given discrepancies in quality of care received across patient cohorts and organizations, it is important to understand the degree to which concordance metrics are robust across organization types. We tested whether concordance between patient selfreport and medical record data would vary with medical organization type, controlling for patient demographic characteristics, health status, and domain of medical care. STUDY
DESIGN: This observational study included 1270 patients sampled from 39 West Coast medical organizations with at least 1 of the following conditions: diabetes, ischemic heart disease, asthma or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, or low back pain.
METHODS: Medical records and patient self-report were used to measure 50 items grouped into 4 conceptual domains: diagnosis, clinical services delivered, counseling and referral, and medication use. We evaluated the concordance between ambulatory medical record and patient survey data. We conducted multivariate logistic regressions to test the impact of medical organization type (medical groups vs independent practice associations), controlling for patient characteristics and domain of care, on 5 concordance measures.
RESULTS: Independent practice associations were associated with worse agreement, survey specificity, and medical record sensitivity, and better medical record specificity compared with medical groups.
CONCLUSIONS: The medical record and patient survey do not measure quality comparably across organization types. We recommend continued efforts to improve survey data collection across different patient populations and to improve the quality of clinical data.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17567226

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


  6 in total

1.  Discordance between patient report and chart review of risk factors for antimicrobial resistance in ED patients.

Authors:  Jeffrey M Caterino; Lauren Graham; Andrew King; Tyler Hoppes
Journal:  Am J Emerg Med       Date:  2013-07-29       Impact factor: 2.469

2.  Active living-oriented zoning codes and cardiometabolic conditions across the lifespan.

Authors:  Shannon N Zenk; Oksana Pugach; Jamie F Chriqui; Coady Wing; Dorrie Raymond; Elizabeth Tarlov; Bethany Sheridan; Kelly K Jones; Sandy J Slater
Journal:  Transl Behav Med       Date:  2022-05-25       Impact factor: 3.626

3.  Self-report versus medical records for assessing cancer-preventive services delivery.

Authors:  Jeanne M Ferrante; Pamela Ohman-Strickland; Karissa A Hahn; Shawna V Hudson; Eric K Shaw; Jesse C Crosson; Benjamin F Crabtree
Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev       Date:  2008-11       Impact factor: 4.254

4.  Medical record validation of self-reported eye diseases and eye care utilization among older adults.

Authors:  Paul A MacLennan; Gerald McGwin; Karen Searcey; Cynthia Owsley
Journal:  Curr Eye Res       Date:  2012-10-18       Impact factor: 2.424

5.  Mental health service utilization after physical trauma: the importance of physician referral.

Authors:  Eunice C Wong; Terry L Schell; Grant N Marshall; Lisa H Jaycox; Katrin Hambarsoomians; Howard Belzberg
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  2009-10       Impact factor: 2.983

6.  Patient-physician agreement on tobacco and alcohol consumption: a multilevel analysis of GPs' characteristics.

Authors:  Jean-Laurent Thebault; Hector Falcoff; Madeleine Favre; Frédérique Noël; Laurent Rigal
Journal:  BMC Health Serv Res       Date:  2015-03-18       Impact factor: 2.655

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.