Jinoos Yazdany1, Mark Robbins2, Gabriela Schmajuk3, Sonali Desai4, Diane Lacaille5, Tuhina Neogi6, Jasvinder A Singh7, Mark Genovese8, Rachel Myslinski9, Natalie Fisk9, Melissa Francisco9, Eric Newman10. 1. University of California, San Francisco. jinoos.yazdany@ucsf.edu. 2. Harvard Vanguard Medical Associates, Atrius Health, Somerville, Massachusetts. 3. University of California, San Francisco. 4. Brigham & Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts. 5. University of British Columbia, Arthritis Research Centre of Canada, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada. 6. Boston University School of Medicine, Boston, Massachusetts. 7. University of Alabama at Birmingham, Palo Alto, California. 8. Stanford University Medical Center, Palo Alto, California. 9. American College of Rheumatology, Atlanta, Georgia. 10. Geisinger Medical Center, Danville, Pennsylvania.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Electronic clinical quality measures (eCQMs) rely on computer algorithms to extract data from electronic health records (EHRs). On behalf of the American College of Rheumatology (ACR), we sought to develop and test eCQMs for rheumatoid arthritis (RA). METHODS: Drawing from published ACR guidelines, a working group developed candidate RA process measures and subsequently assessed face validity through an interdisciplinary panel of health care stakeholders. A public comment period followed. Measures that passed these levels of review were electronically specified using the quality data model, which provides standard nomenclature for data elements (category, datatype, and value sets) obtained through an EHR. For each eCQM, 3 clinical sites using different EHR systems tested the scientific feasibility and validity of measures. Measures appropriate for accountability were presented for national endorsement. RESULTS: Expert panel validity ratings were high for all measures (median 8-9 of 9). Health system performance on the eCQMs was 53.6% for RA disease activity assessment, 69.1% for functional status assessment, 93.1% for disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (DMARD) use, and 72.8% for tuberculosis screening. Kappa statistics, which evaluated whether the eCQM validly captured data obtained from manual EHR chart review, demonstrated moderate to substantial agreement (0.54 for functional status assessment, 0.73 for tuberculosis screening, 0.84 for disease activity, and 0.85 for DMARD use). CONCLUSION: Four eCQMs for RA have achieved national endorsement and are recommended for use in federal quality reporting programs. Implementation and further refinement of these measures is ongoing in the ACR's registry, the Rheumatology Informatics System for Effectiveness (RISE).
OBJECTIVE: Electronic clinical quality measures (eCQMs) rely on computer algorithms to extract data from electronic health records (EHRs). On behalf of the American College of Rheumatology (ACR), we sought to develop and test eCQMs for rheumatoid arthritis (RA). METHODS: Drawing from published ACR guidelines, a working group developed candidate RA process measures and subsequently assessed face validity through an interdisciplinary panel of health care stakeholders. A public comment period followed. Measures that passed these levels of review were electronically specified using the quality data model, which provides standard nomenclature for data elements (category, datatype, and value sets) obtained through an EHR. For each eCQM, 3 clinical sites using different EHR systems tested the scientific feasibility and validity of measures. Measures appropriate for accountability were presented for national endorsement. RESULTS: Expert panel validity ratings were high for all measures (median 8-9 of 9). Health system performance on the eCQMs was 53.6% for RA disease activity assessment, 69.1% for functional status assessment, 93.1% for disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (DMARD) use, and 72.8% for tuberculosis screening. Kappa statistics, which evaluated whether the eCQM validly captured data obtained from manual EHR chart review, demonstrated moderate to substantial agreement (0.54 for functional status assessment, 0.73 for tuberculosis screening, 0.84 for disease activity, and 0.85 for DMARD use). CONCLUSION: Four eCQMs for RA have achieved national endorsement and are recommended for use in federal quality reporting programs. Implementation and further refinement of these measures is ongoing in the ACR's registry, the Rheumatology Informatics System for Effectiveness (RISE).
Authors: Jaclyn Anderson; Liron Caplan; Jinoos Yazdany; Mark L Robbins; Tuhina Neogi; Kaleb Michaud; Kenneth G Saag; James R O'Dell; Salahuddin Kazi Journal: Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken) Date: 2012-05 Impact factor: 4.794
Authors: R Maini; E W St Clair; F Breedveld; D Furst; J Kalden; M Weisman; J Smolen; P Emery; G Harriman; M Feldmann; P Lipsky Journal: Lancet Date: 1999-12-04 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Catherine H MacLean; Kenneth G Saag; Daniel H Solomon; Sally C Morton; Sarah Sampsel; John H Klippel Journal: Arthritis Rheum Date: 2004-04-15
Authors: Jinoos Yazdany; Chris Tonner; Gabriela Schmajuk; Grace A Lin; Amal N Trivedi Journal: Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken) Date: 2014-10 Impact factor: 4.794
Authors: Monika Schoels; Rachel Knevel; Daniel Aletaha; Johannes W J Bijlsma; Ferdinand C Breedveld; Dimitrios T Boumpas; Gerd Burmester; Bernard Combe; Maurizio Cutolo; Maxime Dougados; Paul Emery; Desirée van der Heijde; Tom W J Huizinga; Joachim Kalden; Edward C Keystone; Tore K Kvien; Emilio Martin-Mola; Carlomaurizio Montecucco; Maarten de Wit; Josef S Smolen Journal: Ann Rheum Dis Date: 2010-04 Impact factor: 19.103
Authors: Michaela A Stoffer; Josef S Smolen; Anthony Woolf; Ales Ambrozic; Ailsa Bosworth; Loreto Carmona; Veronika Fialka-Moser; Estibaliz Loza; Pawel Olejnik; Ingemar F Petersson; Till Uhlig; Tanja A Stamm Journal: Ann Rheum Dis Date: 2013-08-06 Impact factor: 19.103
Authors: Evo Alemao; Seongjung Joo; Hugh Kawabata; Maiwenn J Al; Paul D Allison; Maureen P M H Rutten-van Mölken; Michelle L Frits; Christine K Iannaccone; Nancy A Shadick; Michael E Weinblatt Journal: Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken) Date: 2016-03 Impact factor: 4.794
Authors: Claire E H Barber; JoAnn Zell; Jinoos Yazdany; Aileen M Davis; Laura Cappelli; Linda Ehrlich-Jones; Donna Everix; J Carter Thorne; Victoria Bohm; Lisa Suter; Alex Limanni; Kaleb Michaud Journal: Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken) Date: 2019-11-11 Impact factor: 4.794
Authors: Jeffrey R Curtis; Lang Chen; Maria I Danila; Kenneth G Saag; Kathy L Parham; John J Cush Journal: J Rheumatol Date: 2017-11-15 Impact factor: 4.666
Authors: Sarah Patterson; Gabriela Schmajuk; Michael Evans; Ishita Aggarwal; Zara Izadi; Milena Gianfrancesco; Jinoos Yazdany Journal: Jt Comm J Qual Patient Saf Date: 2019-01-25
Authors: Zara Izadi; Gabriela Schmajuk; Milena Gianfrancesco; Meera Subash; Michael Evans; Laura Trupin; Jinoos Yazdany Journal: Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken) Date: 2021-12-27 Impact factor: 4.794