Literature DB >> 21346983

Initial Steps toward Validating and Measuring the Quality of Computerized Provider Documentation.

Kenric W Hammond1, Efthimis N Efthimiadis, Charlene R Weir, Peter J Embi, Stephen M Thielke, Ryan M Laundry, Ashley Hedeen.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Concerns exist about the quality of electronic health care documentation. Prior studies have focused on physicians. This investigation studied document quality perceptions of practitioners (including physicians), nurses and administrative staff.
METHODS: An instrument developed from staff interviews and literature sources was administered to 110 practitioners, nurses and administrative staff. Short, long and original versions of records were rated.
RESULTS: Length transformation did not affect quality ratings. On several scales practitioners rated notes less favorably than administrators or nurses. The original source document was associated with the quality rating, as was tf·idf, a relevance statistic computed from document text. Tf·idf was strongly associated with practitioner quality ratings.
CONCLUSION: Document quality estimates were not sensitive to modifying redundancy in documents. Some perceptions of quality differ by role. Intrinsic document properties are associated with staff judgments of document quality. For practitioners, the tf·idf statistic was strongly associated with the quality dimensions evaluated.

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 21346983      PMCID: PMC3041448     

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  AMIA Annu Symp Proc        ISSN: 1559-4076


  7 in total

1.  Are electronic medical records trustworthy? Observations on copying, pasting and duplication.

Authors:  Kenric W Hammond; Susan T Helbig; Craig C Benson; Beverly M Brathwaite-Sketoe
Journal:  AMIA Annu Symp Proc       Date:  2003

Review 2.  The need for mandatory clinical recording standards.

Authors:  Janis L Huston
Journal:  Clin Med (Lond)       Date:  2004 May-Jun       Impact factor: 2.659

3.  Impacts of computerized physician documentation in a teaching hospital: perceptions of faculty and resident physicians.

Authors:  Peter J Embi; Thomas R Yackel; Judith R Logan; Judith L Bowen; Thomas G Cooney; Paul N Gorman
Journal:  J Am Med Inform Assoc       Date:  2004-04-02       Impact factor: 4.497

4.  Cognitive factors influencing perceptions of clinical documentation tools.

Authors:  S Trent Rosenbloom; Adrienne N Crow; Jennifer Urbano Blackford; Kevin B Johnson
Journal:  J Biomed Inform       Date:  2006-07-08       Impact factor: 6.317

5.  Critical issues in an electronic documentation system.

Authors:  Charlene R Weir; Jonathan R Nebeker
Journal:  AMIA Annu Symp Proc       Date:  2007-10-11

6.  Preliminary development of the physician documentation quality instrument.

Authors:  Peter D Stetson; Frances P Morrison; Suzanne Bakken; Stephen B Johnson
Journal:  J Am Med Inform Assoc       Date:  2008-04-24       Impact factor: 4.497

7.  Direct text entry in electronic progress notes. An evaluation of input errors.

Authors:  C R Weir; J F Hurdle; M A Felgar; J M Hoffman; B Roth; J R Nebeker
Journal:  Methods Inf Med       Date:  2003       Impact factor: 2.176

  7 in total
  4 in total

1.  What are they trying to do?: An analysis of Action Identities in using electronic documentation in an EHR.

Authors:  Charlene R Weir; Catherine Staes; Stacey Slager; Teresa Taft; Valiammai Chidambaram; Heidi Kramer; Bruce E Bray; Seneca Perri Moore
Journal:  AMIA Annu Symp Proc       Date:  2018-04-16

2.  The relationship between structural characteristics of 2010 challenge documents and ratings of document quality.

Authors:  Shuying Shen; Brett R South; Jorie Butler; Robyn Barrus; Charlene Weir
Journal:  AMIA Annu Symp Proc       Date:  2012-11-03

3.  Assessing Electronic Note Quality Using the Physician Documentation Quality Instrument (PDQI-9).

Authors:  Peter D Stetson; Suzanne Bakken; Jesse O Wrenn; Eugenia L Siegler
Journal:  Appl Clin Inform       Date:  2012       Impact factor: 2.342

4.  Computerized provider documentation: findings and implications of a multisite study of clinicians and administrators.

Authors:  Peter J Embi; Charlene Weir; Efthimis N Efthimiadis; Stephen M Thielke; Ashley N Hedeen; Kenric W Hammond
Journal:  J Am Med Inform Assoc       Date:  2013-01-25       Impact factor: 4.497

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.