Literature DB >> 22268215

Use of electronic health record data to evaluate overuse of cervical cancer screening.

Jason S Mathias1, Dana Gossett, David W Baker.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: National organizations historically focused on increasing use of effective services are now attempting to identify and discourage use of low-value services. Electronic health records (EHRs) could be used to measure use of low-value services, but few studies have examined this. The aim of the study was to: (1) determine if EHR data can be used to identify women eligible for an extended Pap testing interval; (2) determine the proportion of these women who received a Pap test sooner than recommended; and (3) assess the consequences of these low-value Pap tests.
METHODS: Electronic query of EHR data identified women aged 30-65 years old who were at low-risk of cervical cancer and therefore eligible for an extended Pap testing interval of 3 years (as per professional society guidelines). Manual chart review assessed query accuracy. The use of low-value Pap tests (ie, those performed sooner than recommended) was measured, and adverse consequences of low-value Pap tests (ie, colposcopies performed as a result of low-value Pap tests) were identified.
RESULTS: Manual chart review confirmed query accuracy. Two-thirds (1120/1705) of low-risk women received a Pap test sooner than recommended, and 21 colposcopies were performed as a result of this low-value Pap testing.
CONCLUSION: Secondary analysis of EHR data can accurately measure the use of low-value services such as Pap testing performed sooner than recommended in women at low risk of cervical cancer. Similar application of our methodology could facilitate efforts to simultaneously improve quality and decrease costs, maximizing value in the US healthcare system.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22268215      PMCID: PMC3392856          DOI: 10.1136/amiajnl-2011-000536

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Am Med Inform Assoc        ISSN: 1067-5027            Impact factor:   4.497


  22 in total

1.  A randomized trial of a computer-based intervention to reduce utilization of redundant laboratory tests.

Authors:  D W Bates; G J Kuperman; E Rittenberg; J M Teich; J Fiskio; N Ma'luf; A Onderdonk; D Wybenga; J Winkelman; T A Brennan; A L Komaroff; M Tanasijevic
Journal:  Am J Med       Date:  1999-02       Impact factor: 4.965

Review 2.  American Cancer Society guideline for the early detection of cervical neoplasia and cancer.

Authors:  Debbie Saslow; Carolyn D Runowicz; Diane Solomon; Anna-Barbara Moscicki; Robert A Smith; Harmon J Eyre; Carmel Cohen
Journal:  CA Cancer J Clin       Date:  2002 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 508.702

Review 3.  Effects of computerized clinical decision support systems on practitioner performance and patient outcomes: a systematic review.

Authors:  Amit X Garg; Neill K J Adhikari; Heather McDonald; M Patricia Rosas-Arellano; P J Devereaux; Joseph Beyene; Justina Sam; R Brian Haynes
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2005-03-09       Impact factor: 56.272

4.  Primary care physicians' awareness and adherence to cervical cancer screening guidelines in Texas.

Authors:  Penelope Holland-Barkis; Samuel N Forjuoh; Glen R Couchman; Charles Capen; Terry G Rascoe; Michael D Reis
Journal:  Prev Med       Date:  2005-11-10       Impact factor: 4.018

5.  Computer predictions of abnormal test results. Effects on outpatient testing.

Authors:  W M Tierney; C J McDonald; S L Hui; D K Martin
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1988-02-26       Impact factor: 56.272

6.  Low-risk human papillomavirus testing and other nonrecommended human papillomavirus testing practices among U.S. health care providers.

Authors:  Jennifer Wai-Yin Lee; Zahava Berkowitz; Mona Saraiya
Journal:  Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2011-07       Impact factor: 7.661

7.  Cost-effectiveness of extending cervical cancer screening intervals among women with prior normal pap tests.

Authors:  Shalini L Kulasingam; Evan R Myers; Herschel W Lawson; K John McConnell; Karla Kerlikowske; Joy Melnikow; A Eugene Washington; George F Sawaya
Journal:  Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2006-02       Impact factor: 7.661

8.  Risk of cervical cancer associated with extending the interval between cervical-cancer screenings.

Authors:  George F Sawaya; K John McConnell; Shalini L Kulasingam; Herschel W Lawson; Karla Kerlikowske; Joy Melnikow; Nancy C Lee; Ginny Gildengorin; Evan R Myers; A Eugene Washington
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2003-10-16       Impact factor: 91.245

Review 9.  The psychological costs of screening for cancer.

Authors:  J Wardle; R Pope
Journal:  J Psychosom Res       Date:  1992-10       Impact factor: 3.006

10.  Psychological response to cervical screening.

Authors:  S Bell; M Porter; H Kitchener; C Fraser; P Fisher; E Mann
Journal:  Prev Med       Date:  1995-11       Impact factor: 4.018

View more
  14 in total

1.  Electronic health records-driven phenotyping: challenges, recent advances, and perspectives.

Authors:  Jyotishman Pathak; Abel N Kho; Joshua C Denny
Journal:  J Am Med Inform Assoc       Date:  2013-12       Impact factor: 4.497

2.  Development and validation of an electronic phenotyping algorithm for chronic kidney disease.

Authors:  Girish N Nadkarni; Omri Gottesman; James G Linneman; Herbert Chase; Richard L Berg; Samira Farouk; Rajiv Nadukuru; Vaneet Lotay; Steve Ellis; George Hripcsak; Peggy Peissig; Chunhua Weng; Erwin P Bottinger
Journal:  AMIA Annu Symp Proc       Date:  2014-11-14

Review 3.  Text Mining for Precision Medicine: Bringing Structure to EHRs and Biomedical Literature to Understand Genes and Health.

Authors:  Michael Simmons; Ayush Singhal; Zhiyong Lu
Journal:  Adv Exp Med Biol       Date:  2016       Impact factor: 2.622

4.  Text Mining of the Electronic Health Record: An Information Extraction Approach for Automated Identification and Subphenotyping of HFpEF Patients for Clinical Trials.

Authors:  Siddhartha R Jonnalagadda; Abhishek K Adupa; Ravi P Garg; Jessica Corona-Cox; Sanjiv J Shah
Journal:  J Cardiovasc Transl Res       Date:  2017-06-05       Impact factor: 4.132

5.  Patient sharing and quality of care: measuring outcomes of care coordination using claims data.

Authors:  Craig E Pollack; Klaus W Lemke; Eric Roberts; Jonathan P Weiner
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  2015-04       Impact factor: 2.983

6.  Applying operations research to optimize a novel population management system for cancer screening.

Authors:  Adrian H Zai; Seokjin Kim; Arnold Kamis; Ken Hung; Jeremiah G Ronquillo; Henry C Chueh; Steven J Atlas
Journal:  J Am Med Inform Assoc       Date:  2013-09-16       Impact factor: 4.497

Review 7.  Evidence for overuse of medical services around the world.

Authors:  Shannon Brownlee; Kalipso Chalkidou; Jenny Doust; Adam G Elshaug; Paul Glasziou; Iona Heath; Somil Nagpal; Vikas Saini; Divya Srivastava; Kelsey Chalmers; Deborah Korenstein
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2017-01-09       Impact factor: 79.321

8.  Clinical research informatics: a conceptual perspective.

Authors:  Michael G Kahn; Chunhua Weng
Journal:  J Am Med Inform Assoc       Date:  2012-04-20       Impact factor: 4.497

Review 9.  A review of approaches to identifying patient phenotype cohorts using electronic health records.

Authors:  Chaitanya Shivade; Preethi Raghavan; Eric Fosler-Lussier; Peter J Embi; Noemie Elhadad; Stephen B Johnson; Albert M Lai
Journal:  J Am Med Inform Assoc       Date:  2013-11-07       Impact factor: 4.497

10.  Granular Quality Reporting for Cervical Cytology Testing.

Authors:  Kavishwar B Wagholikar; Kathy L MacLaughlin; Christopher G Chute; Robert A Greenes; Hongfang Liu; Rajeev Chaudhry
Journal:  AMIA Jt Summits Transl Sci Proc       Date:  2015-03-25
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.