医疗记录中的文档错误和缺陷:系统回顾

IF 1 Q4 HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES Journal of Health Management Pub Date : 2024-03-11 DOI:10.1177/09720634241229545
Azam Shahbodaghi, H. Moghaddasi, F. Asadi, Azamossadat Hosseini
{"title":"医疗记录中的文档错误和缺陷:系统回顾","authors":"Azam Shahbodaghi, H. Moghaddasi, F. Asadi, Azamossadat Hosseini","doi":"10.1177/09720634241229545","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Introduction: Identifying errors in documentation can improve the quality of medical records, healthcare services and health care systems, and thus provide a good framework for improvements in documentation policies. To this end, the current research systematically examined studies reporting documentation errors and deficiencies in medical records. Method: The systematic review was conducted based on PRISMA. Original articles, published in English from January 2009 to April 2019, were retrieved using the Web of Science, Scopus, EMBASE, PubMed and Google Scholar. Results: A total of 7,624 articles were found. After the exclusion of duplicates and irrelevant items from this total, just 48 articles met the requirements of the study, among which 47 had some sorts of incompleteness; inaccuracy, 14 articles; inconsistency, 8 articles; illegibility, 7 articles; unsigned document, 4 articles and irrelevancy, 2 articles. Factors contributing to the incidence of documentation errors included occupational stressors, manual documentation and absence of or a defect in local, national and international standards or guidelines, with 12, 9 and 11 articles, respectively. Discussion: Incompleteness, inaccuracy and inconsistency are common errors in medical records documentation. Adopting necessary policies for enhancing the quality of documentation, making strides towards electronic documentation equipped with automatic error detection systems, and standardising the documentation process can be of great assistance in minimising documentation errors and deficiencies.","PeriodicalId":45421,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Health Management","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Documentation Errors and Deficiencies in Medical Records: A Systematic Review\",\"authors\":\"Azam Shahbodaghi, H. Moghaddasi, F. Asadi, Azamossadat Hosseini\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/09720634241229545\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Introduction: Identifying errors in documentation can improve the quality of medical records, healthcare services and health care systems, and thus provide a good framework for improvements in documentation policies. To this end, the current research systematically examined studies reporting documentation errors and deficiencies in medical records. Method: The systematic review was conducted based on PRISMA. Original articles, published in English from January 2009 to April 2019, were retrieved using the Web of Science, Scopus, EMBASE, PubMed and Google Scholar. Results: A total of 7,624 articles were found. After the exclusion of duplicates and irrelevant items from this total, just 48 articles met the requirements of the study, among which 47 had some sorts of incompleteness; inaccuracy, 14 articles; inconsistency, 8 articles; illegibility, 7 articles; unsigned document, 4 articles and irrelevancy, 2 articles. Factors contributing to the incidence of documentation errors included occupational stressors, manual documentation and absence of or a defect in local, national and international standards or guidelines, with 12, 9 and 11 articles, respectively. Discussion: Incompleteness, inaccuracy and inconsistency are common errors in medical records documentation. Adopting necessary policies for enhancing the quality of documentation, making strides towards electronic documentation equipped with automatic error detection systems, and standardising the documentation process can be of great assistance in minimising documentation errors and deficiencies.\",\"PeriodicalId\":45421,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Health Management\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-03-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Health Management\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/09720634241229545\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Health Management","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/09720634241229545","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

导言:识别文件记录中的错误可以提高医疗记录、医疗服务和医疗系统的质量,从而为改进文件记录政策提供一个良好的框架。为此,本研究对报告医疗记录中的文件错误和缺陷的研究进行了系统性检查。方法:根据 PRISMA 进行系统性审查。使用 Web of Science、Scopus、EMBASE、PubMed 和 Google Scholar 检索 2009 年 1 月至 2019 年 4 月期间发表的英文原创文章。结果:共找到 7624 篇文章。在剔除重复和不相关的文章后,仅有48篇文章符合研究要求,其中47篇存在不完整的情况;不准确的文章有14篇;不一致的文章有8篇;难以辨认的文章有7篇;未署名的文件有4篇;不相关的文章有2篇。导致文件错误发生的因素包括职业压力、手工文件以及地方、国家和国际标准或指南的缺失或缺陷,分别有 12 篇、9 篇和 11 篇。讨论不完整、不准确和不一致是医疗记录文档中常见的错误。采取必要的政策来提高文档质量,大力发展配备自动错误检测系统的电子文档,以及规范文档流程,对减少文档错误和缺陷有很大帮助。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Documentation Errors and Deficiencies in Medical Records: A Systematic Review
Introduction: Identifying errors in documentation can improve the quality of medical records, healthcare services and health care systems, and thus provide a good framework for improvements in documentation policies. To this end, the current research systematically examined studies reporting documentation errors and deficiencies in medical records. Method: The systematic review was conducted based on PRISMA. Original articles, published in English from January 2009 to April 2019, were retrieved using the Web of Science, Scopus, EMBASE, PubMed and Google Scholar. Results: A total of 7,624 articles were found. After the exclusion of duplicates and irrelevant items from this total, just 48 articles met the requirements of the study, among which 47 had some sorts of incompleteness; inaccuracy, 14 articles; inconsistency, 8 articles; illegibility, 7 articles; unsigned document, 4 articles and irrelevancy, 2 articles. Factors contributing to the incidence of documentation errors included occupational stressors, manual documentation and absence of or a defect in local, national and international standards or guidelines, with 12, 9 and 11 articles, respectively. Discussion: Incompleteness, inaccuracy and inconsistency are common errors in medical records documentation. Adopting necessary policies for enhancing the quality of documentation, making strides towards electronic documentation equipped with automatic error detection systems, and standardising the documentation process can be of great assistance in minimising documentation errors and deficiencies.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Health Management
Journal of Health Management HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES-
CiteScore
3.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
84
期刊最新文献
Addressing Discrimination and Healthcare Disparities for Sexual and Gender Minorities in South Africa: A Human Rights-Based Perspective Does COVID-19 Influence the Urban Household’s Food Security in Horo Guduru Wollega Zone, Ethiopia? Real-time Vital Signs Monitoring and Data Management Using a Low-Cost IoT-based Health Monitoring System Does Parental Out-migration Affect Nutritional Health Status and Morbidity Among Children? Evidence From India Human Development Survey Data for the Empowered Action Group States Peer Influence and Factors Associated with Personal Network Size of Underage Drinkers Recruited Through Respondent-driven Sampling 
in Dibrugarh District of Assam, India
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1