Informatics in Primary Care最新文献

Background: This is a study of the relationships between common reasons for encounter (RfEs) and common diagnoses (episode titles) within episodes of care (EoCs) in family practice populations in four countries.

Method: Participating family doctors (FDs) recorded details of all their patient contacts in an EoC structure using the International Classification of Primary Care (ICPC), including RfEs presented by the patient, and the FDs' diagnostic labels. The relationships between RfEs and episode titles were studied using Bayesian methods.

Results: The RfE 'cough' is a strong, reliable predictor for the diagnoses 'cough' (a symptom diagnosis), 'acute bronchitis', 'URTI' and 'acute laryngitis/tracheitis' and a less strong, but reliable predictor for 'sinusitis', 'pneumonia', 'influenza', 'asthma', 'other viral diseases (NOS)', 'whooping cough', 'chronic bronchitis', 'wheezing' and 'phlegm'. The absence of cough is a weak but reliable predictor to exclude a diagnosis of 'cough', 'acute bronchitis' and 'tracheitis'. Its presence allows strong and reliable exclusion of the diagnoses 'gastroenteritis', 'no disease' and 'health promotion/prevention', and less strong exclusion of 'adverse effects of medication'. The RfE 'sadness' is a strong, reliable predictor for the diagnoses 'feeling sad/depressed' and 'depressive disorder'. It is a less strong, but reliable predictor of a diagnosis of 'acute stress reaction'. The absence of sadness (as a symptom) is a weak but reliable predictor to exclude the symptom diagnosis 'feeling sad/depressed'. Its presence does not support the exclusion of any diagnosis.

Conclusions: We describe clinically and statistically significant diagnostic associations observed between the RfEs 'cough' and 'sadness', presenting as a new problem in family practice, and all the episode titles in ICPC.

Background: Demand is increasing for primary care to deliver effective weight management services to patients, but research suggests that staff feel inadequately resourced for such a role. Supporting service delivery with a free and effective web-based weight management programme could maximise primary care resource and provide cost-effective support for patients. However, integration of e-health into primary care may face challenges.

Objectives: To explore primary care staff experiences of delivering weight management services and their perceptions of a web-based weight management programme to aid service delivery.

Methods: Focus groups were conducted with primary care physicians, nurses and healthcare assistants (n = 36) involved in delivering weight loss services. Data were analysed using inductive thematic analysis.

Results: Participants thought that primary care should be involved in delivering weight management, especially when weight was aggravating health problems. However, they felt under-resourced to deliver these services and unsure as to the effectiveness of their input, as routine services were not evaluated. Beliefs that current services were ineffective resulted in staff reluctance to allocate more resources. Participants were hopeful that supplementing practice with a web-based weight management programme would enhance patient services and promote service evaluation.

Conclusions: Although primary care staff felt they should deliver weight loss services, low levels of faith in the efficacy of current treatments resulted in provision of under-resourced and 'ad hoc' services. Integration of a web-based weight loss programme that promotes service evaluation and provides a cost-effective option for supporting patients may encourage practices to invest more in weight management services.

Background: The system informs the nurse about levels of physical activity in the daily living of patients who are using the It's LiFe! tool. The tool consists of an accelerometer that transfers data to a smartphone, which is subsequently connected to a server. Nurses can monitor patients' physical activity via a secured website. Physical activity levels are measured in minutes per day compared with pre-set activity goals, which are set in dialogue with the patient.

Objective: To examine user requirements and to evaluate the usability of the secured website, in order to increase the probability of effective use by nurses.

Method: The needs and preferences of nurses towards the system were determined through qualitative research. The usability of the system was evaluated in a laboratory situation and during a three-month pilot study.

Results: A monitoring and feedback system to support patients in their intention to be more active was developed in a systematic way. Automatically generated feedback messages were defined based on the requirements of nurses. The results from the usability tests gave insights into how to improve the structure and quality of the information provided. Nurses were positive about the features and ease of use of the system, but made critical remarks about the time that its use entails.

Conclusion: The system supports nurses when performing physical activity counselling in a structured and profound way. The opportunity to support self-management of patients in between regular consultations needs further investigation, and adaptation into the clinical workflow of the nurses.

Background: Clinical data are collected for routine care in family practice; there are also a growing number of genetic and cancer registry data repositories. The Translational Research and Patient Safety in Europe (TRANSFoRm) project seeks to facilitate research using linked data from more than one source. We performed a requirements analysis which identified a wide range of data and business process requirements that need to be met before linking primary care and either genetic or disease registry data.

Objectives: To develop a survey to assess the readiness of data repositories to participate in linked research - the Transform International Research Readiness (TIRRE) survey.

Method: We develop the questionnaire based on our requirement analysis; with questions at micro-, meso- and macro levels of granularity, study-specific questions about diabetes and gastro-oesophageal reflux disease (GORD), and research track record. The scope of the data required was extensive. We piloted this instrument, conducting ten preliminary telephone interviews to evaluate the response to the questionnaire.

Results: Using feedback gained from these interviews we revised the questionnaire; clarifying questions that were difficult to answer and utilising skip logic to create different series of questions for the various types of data repository. We simplified the questionnaire replacing free-text responses with yes/no or picking list options, wherever possible. We placed the final questionnaire online and encouraged its use (www.clininf.eu/jointirre/info.html).

Conclusion: Limited field testing suggests that TIRRE is capable of collecting comprehensive and relevant data about the suitability and readiness of data repositories to participate in linked data research.

Purpose: Computerised decision support systems are designed to support clinicians in making decisions and thereby enhance the quality and safety of care. We aimed to undertake an interpretative review of the empirical evidence on computerised decision support systems, their contexts of use, and summarise evidence on the effectiveness of these tools and insights into how these can be successfully implemented and adopted.

Methods: We systematically searched the empirical literature to identify systematic literature reviews on computerised decision support applications and their impact on the quality and safety of healthcare delivery over a 13-year period (1997-2010). The databases searched included: MEDLINE, EMBASE, The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects, The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, The Cochrane Methodology Register, The Health Technology Assessment Database, and The National Health Service (NHS) Economic Evaluation Database. To be eligible for inclusion, systematic reviews needed to address computerised decision support systems, and at least one of the following: impact on safety; quality; or organisational, implementation or adoption considerations.

Results: Our searches yielded 121 systematic reviews relating to eHealth, of which we identified 41 as investigating computerised decision support systems. These indicated that, whilst there was a lack of investigating potential risks, such tools can result in improvements in practitioner performance in the promotion of preventive care and guideline adherence, particularly if specific information is available in real time and systems are effectively integrated into clinical workflows. However, the evidence regarding impact on patient outcomes was less clear-cut with reviews finding either no, inconsistent or modest benefits.

Conclusions: Whilst the potential of clinical decision support systems in improving, in particular, practitioner performance is considerable, such technology may also introduce new risks resulting not only from technical challenges (such as data inaccuracies) but also from disruption of clinical workflows. Moving forward, there is a need for system development, procurement and implementation to be characterised by a user 'pull' and then tailor systems to the needs of users.

Background: The case has historically been presented that structured and/or coded electronic health records (EHRs) benefit direct patient care, but the evidence base for this is not well documented.

Methods: We searched for evidence of direct patient care value from the use of structured and/or coded information within EHRs. We interrogated nine international databases from 1990 to 2011. Value was defined using the Institute of Medicine's six areas for improvement for healthcare systems: effectiveness, safety, patient-centredness, timeliness, efficiency and equitability. We included studies satisfying the Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care (EPOC) group criteria.

Results: Of 5016 potentially eligible papers, 13 studies satisfied our criteria: 10 focused on effectiveness, with eight demonstrating potential for improved proxy and actual clinical outcomes if a structured and/or coded EHR was combined with alerting or advisory systems in a focused clinical domain. Three studies demonstrated improvement in safety outcomes. No studies were found reporting value in relation to patient-centredness, timeliness, efficiency or equitability.

Conclusions: We conclude that, to date, there has been patchy effort to investigate empirically the value from structuring and coding EHRs for direct patient care. Future investments in structuring and coding of EHRs should be informed by robust evidence as to the clinical scenarios in which patient care benefits may be realised.

Background: Innovators have piloted improvements in communication, changed patterns of practice and patient empowerment from online access to electronic health records (EHR). International studies of online services, such as prescription ordering, online appointment booking and secure communications with primary care, show good uptake of email consultations, accessing test results and booking appointments; when technologies and business process are in place. Online access and transactional services are due to be rolled out across England by 2015; this review seeks to explore the impact of online access to health records and other online services on the quality and safety of primary health care.

Objective: To assess the factors that may affect the provision of online patient access to their EHR and transactional services, and the impact of such access on the quality and safety of health care.

Method: Two reviewers independently searched 11 international databases during the period 1999-2012. A range of papers including descriptive studies using qualitative or quantitative methods, hypothesis-testing studies and systematic reviews were included. A detailed eligibility criterion will be used to shape study inclusion. A team of experts will review these papers for eligibility, extract data using a customised extraction form and use the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) instrument to determine the quality of the evidence and the strengths of any recommendation. Data will then be descriptively summarised and thematically synthesised. Where feasible, we will perform a quantitative meta-analysis. Prospero (International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews) registration number: crd42012003091.

Background: The review of clinical data extraction from electronic records is increasingly being used as a tool to assist general practitioners (GPs) manage their patients in Australia. Type 2 diabetes (T2DM) is a chronic condition cared for primarily in the general practice setting that lends itself to the application of tools in this area.

Objective: To assess the feasibility of extracting data from a general practice medical record software package to predict clinically significant outcomes for patients with T2DM.

Methods: A pilot study was conducted involving two large practices where routinely collected clinical data were extracted and inputted into the United Kingdom Prospective Diabetes Study Outcomes Model to predict life expectancy. An initial assessment of the completeness of data available was performed and then for those patients aged between 45 and 64 years with adequate data life expectancies estimated.

Results: A total of 1019 patients were identified as current patients with T2DM. There were sufficient data available on 40% of patients from one practice and 49% from the other to provide inputs into the UKPDS Outcomes Model. Predicted life expectancy was similar across the practices with women having longer life expectancies than men. Improved compliance with current management guidelines for glycaemic, lipid and blood pressure control was demonstrated to increase life expectancy between 1.0 and 2.4 years dependent on gender and age group.

Conclusion: This pilot demonstrated that clinical data extraction from electronic records is feasible although there are several limitations chiefly caused by the incompleteness of data for patients with T2DM.

Background: Despite international efforts moving toward integrated care using health information technologies and the potential of electronic PHRs to help us better coordinate patient-centered care, PHR adoption in the United States remains low among patients who have been offered free access to them from private-sector companies. If older adult stand to benefit from the use of PHRs for its usefulness in self-managing chronic illness, why have they not been more readily adopted? Since the chronically ill older adult has unique circumstances that impact their decision to participate in self-directed care, a theoretical framework to help understand factors that influence the adoption of PHRs is important. Here we describe the results of an exploratory study that provided an initial test of such a framework.

Methods: The study used a descriptive survey methodology with 38 older adults. The survey questionnaire asked about the personal barriers and facilitators associated with personal health record adoption and included items measuring each of the PHRAM's four interacting factors (environmental factors, personal factors, technology factors, and self-management), and the resulting behavioral outcome.

Results: Younger seniors had a more positive attitude toward computers, knew what health resources were available on the internet, agreed that they had the resources in place to use PHRs, and would be more influenced by a family member than a healthcare provider to use them. Conversely, older seniors reported less confidence in their ability to use Internet-based PHRs and did not perceive that they had the resources in place to use them.

Conclusions: The results of this study indicated that personal, environmental, technology, chronic illness, and behavioral factors operated concurrently as personal barriers and/or facilitators to the adoption of PHRs among the older adult with chronic illness. These factors cannot be isolated because the person commonly weighs risk with benefit and determines the personal value of adopting PHRs.