Implementation of Laboratory Review of Test Builds Within the Electronic Health Record Reduces Errors

As electronic health records (EHRs) become more ubiquitous, physicians have come to expect that laboratory data from a variety of sources will be incorporated into the EHR in a structured format. The Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments have standards for data transmission traditionally met by...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Archives of pathology & laboratory medicine (1976) 2020-06, Vol.144 (6), p.742-747
Hauptverfasser: Barry, Courtney, Edmonston, Tina Bocker, Gandhi, Snehal, Ganti, Kennedy, Kim, Nami, Bierl, Charlene
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 747
container_issue 6
container_start_page 742
container_title Archives of pathology & laboratory medicine (1976)
container_volume 144
creator Barry, Courtney
Edmonston, Tina Bocker
Gandhi, Snehal
Ganti, Kennedy
Kim, Nami
Bierl, Charlene
description As electronic health records (EHRs) become more ubiquitous, physicians have come to expect that laboratory data from a variety of sources will be incorporated into the EHR in a structured format. The Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments have standards for data transmission traditionally met by pathologist review of their own hospital laboratory information system transmissions. However, with third-party laboratory data now being sent through external (nonhospital laboratory) interfaces, ownership of this review is less clear. Lack of an expert laboratory review process prior to changes being implemented can result in mapping and interfacing errors that could lead to misinterpretation and diagnostic errors. To determine the impact of retrospective and prospective laboratorian-assisted review on the volume of interface errors and new builds. A seminal event led to a restructuring of the process for review of EHR laboratory builds, using laboratory expertise. A review of 26 500 test result fields found 61 of 4282 (1.4%) unique codes that could have led to misinterpretation. These were corrected and a process for proactive review and maintenance by laboratory experts was implemented. This resulted in monthly decreases in outbound error message from 4270 to 1820 (57.4%), in new test builds from 586 to 274 (53.2%), and in new result builds from 1116 to 552 (50.5%). Regular review and maintenance of external laboratory test builds in EHRs by a laboratory review team reduces interface error messages and reduces the number of new builds required for results to file into the EHR.
doi_str_mv 10.5858/arpa.2019-0239-OA
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>gale_proqu</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2308520238</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><galeid>A629317603</galeid><sourcerecordid>A629317603</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c403t-1ccfd0157815a38197adca1c2cc5e7ad2d4c7d39042fce4b2b620d4fb3866a0d3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpdkc1q3DAUhUVJaaZpHyCbIAiUbpzqx7Kl5SRMm8DAQEnpUsjSdcZBtiaSnJK3r9xJu-jqSuI74txzEDqn5EpIIb-YeDBXjFBVEcZVtVu_QSsqal4x2ogTtCKE8EopKU7R-5Qey1UxRt-hU06buuW0XSG4Gw8eRpiyyUOYcOjx1nQhmhziC_4OzwP8Wh7vIWV8PQ_eJfxzyPthwnkPeOPB5himweJbMD7vi8SG6Mpws4WENzGGmD6gt73xCT6-zjP04-vm_ua22u6-3d2st5WtCc8VtbZ3hIpWUmG4pKo1zhpqmbUCypm52raOK1Kz3kLdsa5hxNV9x2XTGOL4Gfp8_PcQw9NcLOtxSBa8NxOEOWnGiRSshCULevkf-hjmOBV3mtVESUWpWKhPR-rBeND7Pyum4Oclq6TXDVMlxYbwAtIjaGNIKUKvD3EYTXzRlOilLL2UpZey9FKW3q2L5uLVwtyN4P4p_rbDfwOZepBd</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2409891158</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Implementation of Laboratory Review of Test Builds Within the Electronic Health Record Reduces Errors</title><source>Allen Press Journals</source><source>Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals</source><creator>Barry, Courtney ; Edmonston, Tina Bocker ; Gandhi, Snehal ; Ganti, Kennedy ; Kim, Nami ; Bierl, Charlene</creator><creatorcontrib>Barry, Courtney ; Edmonston, Tina Bocker ; Gandhi, Snehal ; Ganti, Kennedy ; Kim, Nami ; Bierl, Charlene</creatorcontrib><description>As electronic health records (EHRs) become more ubiquitous, physicians have come to expect that laboratory data from a variety of sources will be incorporated into the EHR in a structured format. The Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments have standards for data transmission traditionally met by pathologist review of their own hospital laboratory information system transmissions. However, with third-party laboratory data now being sent through external (nonhospital laboratory) interfaces, ownership of this review is less clear. Lack of an expert laboratory review process prior to changes being implemented can result in mapping and interfacing errors that could lead to misinterpretation and diagnostic errors. To determine the impact of retrospective and prospective laboratorian-assisted review on the volume of interface errors and new builds. A seminal event led to a restructuring of the process for review of EHR laboratory builds, using laboratory expertise. A review of 26 500 test result fields found 61 of 4282 (1.4%) unique codes that could have led to misinterpretation. These were corrected and a process for proactive review and maintenance by laboratory experts was implemented. This resulted in monthly decreases in outbound error message from 4270 to 1820 (57.4%), in new test builds from 586 to 274 (53.2%), and in new result builds from 1116 to 552 (50.5%). Regular review and maintenance of external laboratory test builds in EHRs by a laboratory review team reduces interface error messages and reduces the number of new builds required for results to file into the EHR.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0003-9985</identifier><identifier>ISSN: 1543-2165</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1543-2165</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.5858/arpa.2019-0239-OA</identifier><identifier>PMID: 31647317</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: College of American Pathologists</publisher><subject>Antigens ; Biomedical laboratories ; Codes ; Electronic health records ; Electronic medical records ; Electronic records ; Health facilities construction ; Hospitals ; Informatics ; Information systems ; Information technology ; Interfaces ; Medical errors ; Medical laboratories ; Medical records ; Nomenclature ; Pathology ; Patients</subject><ispartof>Archives of pathology &amp; laboratory medicine (1976), 2020-06, Vol.144 (6), p.742-747</ispartof><rights>COPYRIGHT 2020 College of American Pathologists</rights><rights>Copyright College of American Pathologists Jun 2020</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c403t-1ccfd0157815a38197adca1c2cc5e7ad2d4c7d39042fce4b2b620d4fb3866a0d3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c403t-1ccfd0157815a38197adca1c2cc5e7ad2d4c7d39042fce4b2b620d4fb3866a0d3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27924,27925</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31647317$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Barry, Courtney</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Edmonston, Tina Bocker</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gandhi, Snehal</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ganti, Kennedy</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kim, Nami</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bierl, Charlene</creatorcontrib><title>Implementation of Laboratory Review of Test Builds Within the Electronic Health Record Reduces Errors</title><title>Archives of pathology &amp; laboratory medicine (1976)</title><addtitle>Arch Pathol Lab Med</addtitle><description>As electronic health records (EHRs) become more ubiquitous, physicians have come to expect that laboratory data from a variety of sources will be incorporated into the EHR in a structured format. The Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments have standards for data transmission traditionally met by pathologist review of their own hospital laboratory information system transmissions. However, with third-party laboratory data now being sent through external (nonhospital laboratory) interfaces, ownership of this review is less clear. Lack of an expert laboratory review process prior to changes being implemented can result in mapping and interfacing errors that could lead to misinterpretation and diagnostic errors. To determine the impact of retrospective and prospective laboratorian-assisted review on the volume of interface errors and new builds. A seminal event led to a restructuring of the process for review of EHR laboratory builds, using laboratory expertise. A review of 26 500 test result fields found 61 of 4282 (1.4%) unique codes that could have led to misinterpretation. These were corrected and a process for proactive review and maintenance by laboratory experts was implemented. This resulted in monthly decreases in outbound error message from 4270 to 1820 (57.4%), in new test builds from 586 to 274 (53.2%), and in new result builds from 1116 to 552 (50.5%). Regular review and maintenance of external laboratory test builds in EHRs by a laboratory review team reduces interface error messages and reduces the number of new builds required for results to file into the EHR.</description><subject>Antigens</subject><subject>Biomedical laboratories</subject><subject>Codes</subject><subject>Electronic health records</subject><subject>Electronic medical records</subject><subject>Electronic records</subject><subject>Health facilities construction</subject><subject>Hospitals</subject><subject>Informatics</subject><subject>Information systems</subject><subject>Information technology</subject><subject>Interfaces</subject><subject>Medical errors</subject><subject>Medical laboratories</subject><subject>Medical records</subject><subject>Nomenclature</subject><subject>Pathology</subject><subject>Patients</subject><issn>0003-9985</issn><issn>1543-2165</issn><issn>1543-2165</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2020</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><sourceid>GNUQQ</sourceid><recordid>eNpdkc1q3DAUhUVJaaZpHyCbIAiUbpzqx7Kl5SRMm8DAQEnpUsjSdcZBtiaSnJK3r9xJu-jqSuI74txzEDqn5EpIIb-YeDBXjFBVEcZVtVu_QSsqal4x2ogTtCKE8EopKU7R-5Qey1UxRt-hU06buuW0XSG4Gw8eRpiyyUOYcOjx1nQhmhziC_4OzwP8Wh7vIWV8PQ_eJfxzyPthwnkPeOPB5himweJbMD7vi8SG6Mpws4WENzGGmD6gt73xCT6-zjP04-vm_ua22u6-3d2st5WtCc8VtbZ3hIpWUmG4pKo1zhpqmbUCypm52raOK1Kz3kLdsa5hxNV9x2XTGOL4Gfp8_PcQw9NcLOtxSBa8NxOEOWnGiRSshCULevkf-hjmOBV3mtVESUWpWKhPR-rBeND7Pyum4Oclq6TXDVMlxYbwAtIjaGNIKUKvD3EYTXzRlOilLL2UpZey9FKW3q2L5uLVwtyN4P4p_rbDfwOZepBd</recordid><startdate>202006</startdate><enddate>202006</enddate><creator>Barry, Courtney</creator><creator>Edmonston, Tina Bocker</creator><creator>Gandhi, Snehal</creator><creator>Ganti, Kennedy</creator><creator>Kim, Nami</creator><creator>Bierl, Charlene</creator><general>College of American Pathologists</general><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>4T-</scope><scope>4U-</scope><scope>7RV</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>88I</scope><scope>8AF</scope><scope>8AO</scope><scope>8C1</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FH</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BBNVY</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>KB0</scope><scope>LK8</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>M2P</scope><scope>M7P</scope><scope>NAPCQ</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>202006</creationdate><title>Implementation of Laboratory Review of Test Builds Within the Electronic Health Record Reduces Errors</title><author>Barry, Courtney ; Edmonston, Tina Bocker ; Gandhi, Snehal ; Ganti, Kennedy ; Kim, Nami ; Bierl, Charlene</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c403t-1ccfd0157815a38197adca1c2cc5e7ad2d4c7d39042fce4b2b620d4fb3866a0d3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2020</creationdate><topic>Antigens</topic><topic>Biomedical laboratories</topic><topic>Codes</topic><topic>Electronic health records</topic><topic>Electronic medical records</topic><topic>Electronic records</topic><topic>Health facilities construction</topic><topic>Hospitals</topic><topic>Informatics</topic><topic>Information systems</topic><topic>Information technology</topic><topic>Interfaces</topic><topic>Medical errors</topic><topic>Medical laboratories</topic><topic>Medical records</topic><topic>Nomenclature</topic><topic>Pathology</topic><topic>Patients</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Barry, Courtney</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Edmonston, Tina Bocker</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gandhi, Snehal</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ganti, Kennedy</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kim, Nami</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bierl, Charlene</creatorcontrib><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Docstoc</collection><collection>University Readers</collection><collection>Nursing &amp; Allied Health Database</collection><collection>Health &amp; Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Science Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>STEM Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Pharma Collection</collection><collection>Public Health Database</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Health &amp; Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Nursing &amp; Allied Health Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>Health &amp; Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>Science Database</collection><collection>Biological Science Database</collection><collection>Nursing &amp; Allied Health Premium</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Archives of pathology &amp; laboratory medicine (1976)</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Barry, Courtney</au><au>Edmonston, Tina Bocker</au><au>Gandhi, Snehal</au><au>Ganti, Kennedy</au><au>Kim, Nami</au><au>Bierl, Charlene</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Implementation of Laboratory Review of Test Builds Within the Electronic Health Record Reduces Errors</atitle><jtitle>Archives of pathology &amp; laboratory medicine (1976)</jtitle><addtitle>Arch Pathol Lab Med</addtitle><date>2020-06</date><risdate>2020</risdate><volume>144</volume><issue>6</issue><spage>742</spage><epage>747</epage><pages>742-747</pages><issn>0003-9985</issn><issn>1543-2165</issn><eissn>1543-2165</eissn><abstract>As electronic health records (EHRs) become more ubiquitous, physicians have come to expect that laboratory data from a variety of sources will be incorporated into the EHR in a structured format. The Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments have standards for data transmission traditionally met by pathologist review of their own hospital laboratory information system transmissions. However, with third-party laboratory data now being sent through external (nonhospital laboratory) interfaces, ownership of this review is less clear. Lack of an expert laboratory review process prior to changes being implemented can result in mapping and interfacing errors that could lead to misinterpretation and diagnostic errors. To determine the impact of retrospective and prospective laboratorian-assisted review on the volume of interface errors and new builds. A seminal event led to a restructuring of the process for review of EHR laboratory builds, using laboratory expertise. A review of 26 500 test result fields found 61 of 4282 (1.4%) unique codes that could have led to misinterpretation. These were corrected and a process for proactive review and maintenance by laboratory experts was implemented. This resulted in monthly decreases in outbound error message from 4270 to 1820 (57.4%), in new test builds from 586 to 274 (53.2%), and in new result builds from 1116 to 552 (50.5%). Regular review and maintenance of external laboratory test builds in EHRs by a laboratory review team reduces interface error messages and reduces the number of new builds required for results to file into the EHR.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>College of American Pathologists</pub><pmid>31647317</pmid><doi>10.5858/arpa.2019-0239-OA</doi><tpages>6</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0003-9985
ispartof Archives of pathology & laboratory medicine (1976), 2020-06, Vol.144 (6), p.742-747
issn 0003-9985
1543-2165
1543-2165
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2308520238
source Allen Press Journals; Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals
subjects Antigens
Biomedical laboratories
Codes
Electronic health records
Electronic medical records
Electronic records
Health facilities construction
Hospitals
Informatics
Information systems
Information technology
Interfaces
Medical errors
Medical laboratories
Medical records
Nomenclature
Pathology
Patients
title Implementation of Laboratory Review of Test Builds Within the Electronic Health Record Reduces Errors
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-04T15%3A48%3A30IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-gale_proqu&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Implementation%20of%20Laboratory%20Review%20of%20Test%20Builds%20Within%20the%20Electronic%20Health%20Record%20Reduces%20Errors&rft.jtitle=Archives%20of%20pathology%20&%20laboratory%20medicine%20(1976)&rft.au=Barry,%20Courtney&rft.date=2020-06&rft.volume=144&rft.issue=6&rft.spage=742&rft.epage=747&rft.pages=742-747&rft.issn=0003-9985&rft.eissn=1543-2165&rft_id=info:doi/10.5858/arpa.2019-0239-OA&rft_dat=%3Cgale_proqu%3EA629317603%3C/gale_proqu%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2409891158&rft_id=info:pmid/31647317&rft_galeid=A629317603&rfr_iscdi=true