Lori L Popejoy1, Mohammed A Khalilia2, Mihail Popescu3, Colleen Galambos4, Vanessa Lyons1, Marilyn Rantz1, Lanis Hicks3, Frank Stetzer1. 1. Sinclair School of Nursing, University of Missouri, Columbia, Missouri, USA. 2. Department of Computer Science, University of Missouri, Columbia, Missouri, USA. 3. Health Management and Informatics Department, University of Missouri, Columbia, Missouri, USA. 4. School of Social Work, University of Missouri, Columbia, Missouri, USA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: This research identifies specific care coordination activities used by Aging in Place (AIP) nurse care coordinators and home healthcare (HHC) nurses when coordinating care for older community-dwelling adults and suggests a method to quantify care coordination. METHODS: A care coordination ontology was built based on activities extracted from 11,038 notes labeled with the Omaha Case management category. From the parsed narrative notes of every patient, we mapped the extracted activities to the ontology, from which we computed problem profiles and quantified care coordination for all patients. RESULTS: We compared two groups of patients: AIP who received enhanced care coordination (n=217) and HHC who received traditional care (n=691) using 128,135 narratives notes. Patients were tracked from the time they were admitted to AIP or HHC until they were discharged. We found that patients in AIP received a higher dose of care coordination than HHC in most Omaha problems, with larger doses being given in AIP than in HHC in all four Omaha categories. CONCLUSIONS: 'Communicate' and 'manage' activities are widely used in care coordination. This confirmed the expert hypothesis that nurse care coordinators spent most of their time communicating about their patients and managing problems. Overall, nurses performed care coordination in both AIP and HHC, but the aggregated dose across Omaha problems and categories is larger in AIP.
OBJECTIVE: This research identifies specific care coordination activities used by Aging in Place (AIP) nurse care coordinators and home healthcare (HHC) nurses when coordinating care for older community-dwelling adults and suggests a method to quantify care coordination. METHODS: A care coordination ontology was built based on activities extracted from 11,038 notes labeled with the Omaha Case management category. From the parsed narrative notes of every patient, we mapped the extracted activities to the ontology, from which we computed problem profiles and quantified care coordination for all patients. RESULTS: We compared two groups of patients: AIP who received enhanced care coordination (n=217) and HHC who received traditional care (n=691) using 128,135 narratives notes. Patients were tracked from the time they were admitted to AIP or HHC until they were discharged. We found that patients in AIP received a higher dose of care coordination than HHC in most Omaha problems, with larger doses being given in AIP than in HHC in all four Omaha categories. CONCLUSIONS: 'Communicate' and 'manage' activities are widely used in care coordination. This confirmed the expert hypothesis that nurse care coordinators spent most of their time communicating about their patients and managing problems. Overall, nurses performed care coordination in both AIP and HHC, but the aggregated dose across Omaha problems and categories is larger in AIP.
Authors: Guergana K Savova; James J Masanz; Philip V Ogren; Jiaping Zheng; Sunghwan Sohn; Karin C Kipper-Schuler; Christopher G Chute Journal: J Am Med Inform Assoc Date: 2010 Sep-Oct Impact factor: 4.497
Authors: Michelle Camicia; Barbara Chamberlain; Rhonda Ray Finnie; Maureen Nalle; Linda L Lindeke; Lourdes Lorenz; Debra Hain; Kenya D Haney; Nancy Campbell-Heider; Kathryn Pecenka-Johnson; Trinna Jones; Nat'e Parker-Guyton; Garry Brydges; William T Briggs; Mary Catherine Cisco; Cynthia Haney; Peter McMenamin Journal: Nurs Outlook Date: 2013 Nov-Dec Impact factor: 3.250
Authors: Karen Dorman Marek; Lori Popejoy; Greg Petroski; David Mehr; Marilyn Rantz; Wen-Chieh Lin Journal: Nurs Res Date: 2005 May-Jun Impact factor: 2.381
Authors: Mary D Naylor; Dorothy A Brooten; Roberta L Campbell; Greg Maislin; Kathleen M McCauley; J Sanford Schwartz Journal: J Am Geriatr Soc Date: 2004-05 Impact factor: 5.562
Authors: Emily Gill; Patricia C Dykes; Robert S Rudin; Marianne Storm; Kelly McGrath; David W Bates Journal: Int J Med Inform Date: 2020-02-19 Impact factor: 4.046
Authors: David S Carrell; Robert E Schoen; Daniel A Leffler; Michele Morris; Sherri Rose; Andrew Baer; Seth D Crockett; Rebecca A Gourevitch; Katie M Dean; Ateev Mehrotra Journal: J Am Med Inform Assoc Date: 2017-09-01 Impact factor: 4.497
Authors: Amy Joseph; Charles Mullett; Christa Lilly; Matthew Armistead; Harold J Cox; Michael Denney; Misha Varma; David Rich; Donald A Adjeroh; Gianfranco Doretto; William Neal; Lee A Pyles Journal: Appl Clin Inform Date: 2021-01-06 Impact factor: 2.342
Authors: Seyedmostafa Sheikhalishahi; Riccardo Miotto; Joel T Dudley; Alberto Lavelli; Fabio Rinaldi; Venet Osmani Journal: JMIR Med Inform Date: 2019-04-27