对电子健康记录中临床信息的结构和编码对直接患者护理的价值的经验证据进行审查。

Dipak Kalra, Bernard Fernando, Zoe Morrison, Aziz Sheikh
{"title":"对电子健康记录中临床信息的结构和编码对直接患者护理的价值的经验证据进行审查。","authors":"Dipak Kalra,&nbsp;Bernard Fernando,&nbsp;Zoe Morrison,&nbsp;Aziz Sheikh","doi":"10.14236/jhi.v20i3.22","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>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.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>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.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>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.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>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.</p>","PeriodicalId":30591,"journal":{"name":"Informatics in Primary Care","volume":"20 3","pages":"171-80"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2012-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"15","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A review of the empirical evidence of the value of structuring and coding of clinical information within electronic health records for direct patient care.\",\"authors\":\"Dipak Kalra,&nbsp;Bernard Fernando,&nbsp;Zoe Morrison,&nbsp;Aziz Sheikh\",\"doi\":\"10.14236/jhi.v20i3.22\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>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.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>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.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>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.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>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.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":30591,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Informatics in Primary Care\",\"volume\":\"20 3\",\"pages\":\"171-80\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2012-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"15\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Informatics in Primary Care\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.14236/jhi.v20i3.22\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Informatics in Primary Care","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.14236/jhi.v20i3.22","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 15

摘要

背景:历史上一直有人提出结构化和/或编码电子健康记录(EHRs)有利于患者的直接护理,但这方面的证据基础没有得到很好的记录。方法:我们从电子病历中使用结构化和/或编码信息中寻找直接患者护理价值的证据。从1990年到2011年,我们查询了9个国际数据库。价值是根据医学研究所提出的医疗保健系统改进的六个方面来定义的:有效性、安全性、以患者为中心、及时性、效率和公平性。我们纳入了符合Cochrane有效实践和护理组织(EPOC)组标准的研究。结果:在5016篇可能符合条件的论文中,13篇研究满足我们的标准:10篇研究侧重于有效性,8篇研究表明,如果结构化和/或编码的电子病历与重点临床领域的警报或咨询系统相结合,可能会改善代理和实际临床结果。三项研究证明了安全性结果的改善。没有研究发现报告与病人为中心、及时性、效率或公平性有关的价值。结论:我们得出的结论是,到目前为止,已经有零星的努力调查经验价值从结构和编码电子病历直接病人护理。未来在电子病历的结构和编码方面的投资应该有关于患者护理益处可能实现的临床场景的有力证据。
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
A review of the empirical evidence of the value of structuring and coding of clinical information within electronic health records for direct patient care.

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.

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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
14 weeks
期刊最新文献
Exploring an informed decision-making framework using in-home sensors: older adults' perceptions. Undertaking sociotechnical evaluations of health information technologies. Privacy protection for personal health information and shared care records. Coding errors in an analysis of the impact of pay-for-performance on the care for long-term cardiovascular disease: a case study. Effective pseudonymisation and explicit statements of public interest to ensure the benefits of sharing health data for research, quality improvement and health service management outweigh the risks.
×
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