Using an explicit guideline-based criterion and implicit review to assess antipsychotic dosing performance for schizophrenia
Objective. Using structured implicit review as the gold standard, this study assessed the sensitivity and specificity of an explicit antipsychotic dose criterion derived from schizophrenia guidelines. Design. Two psychiatrists reviewed medical records and made consensus-structured implicit review ra...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | International journal for quality in health care 2002-06, Vol.14 (3), p.199-206 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 206 |
---|---|
container_issue | 3 |
container_start_page | 199 |
container_title | International journal for quality in health care |
container_volume | 14 |
creator | OWEN, RICHARD R. THRUSH, CAROL R. HUDSON, TERESA J. MALLORY, SUSAN R. FISCHER, ELLEN P. CLARDY, JAMES A. WILLIAMS, D. KEITH |
description | Objective. Using structured implicit review as the gold standard, this study assessed the sensitivity and specificity of an explicit antipsychotic dose criterion derived from schizophrenia guidelines. Design. Two psychiatrists reviewed medical records and made consensus-structured implicit review ratings of the appropriateness of discharge antipsychotic dosages for hospitalized patients who participated in a schizophrenia outcomes study. Structured implicit review ratings were compared with the explicit criterion: whether antipsychotic dose was within the guideline-recommended range of 300–1000 chlorpromazine milligram equivalents (CPZE). In addition, reasons for deviation from guideline dose recommendations were examined. Setting and study participants. A total of 66 patients hospitalized for acute schizophrenia at a Veterans Affairs medical center or state hospital in the southeastern US. Main outcome measures. The sensitivity and specificity of the explicit dose criterion at hospital discharge were determined in comparison with the gold standard of structured implicit review. Results. At hospital discharge, 61% of patients (n= 40) were receiving doses within the guideline-recommended range. According to structured implicit review ratings, antipsychotic dose management was appropriate for 80% (n= 53) of patients. When the 300–1000 CPZE dose criterion (dosage within or outside the recommended range) was compared with structured implicit review, it demonstrated 84.6% sensitivity and 71.7% specificity for detecting inappropriate antipsychotic dose. Conclusions. The explicit antipsychotic dose criterion may provide a useful and efficient screen to identify patients at significant risk for quality of care problems; however, the relatively low specificity suggests that the measure may not be appropriate for quality measurement programs that compare performance among health plans. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1093/oxfordjournals.intqhc.a002611 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>jstor_proqu</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_71874919</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><jstor_id>45125771</jstor_id><sourcerecordid>45125771</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c463t-c7f3fa6a71dfce89d151b1af1d78f48600af95af4680551b1e1c543622bb83973</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpdkV-L1DAUxYso7h_9CEoQ3LeOSdMk7YMPy6COuKCIi4svIU1vdjK2TTdJdVb88GZsXVHykAvnd09y78my5wSvCK7pC7c3zrc7N_lBdWFlh3iz1SuFccEJuZcdk5KXOeVC3E81ZTQvGWZH2UkIO4wJp4w_zI5IQXDFKD7Ofl4GO1wjNSDYj53VNqLrybbQ2QHyRgVokfY2grduSFSLbL9gHr5Z-I6iQyoECCGp0Y7hVm9dtBq17rfxCD79t1eDBpQKFPTW_nDj1sNg1aPsgUlDwOPlPs0uX7_6tN7kF-_fvF2fX-S65DTmWhhqFFeCtEZDVbeEkYYoQ1pRmbLiGCtTM2VKXmF2kIBoVlJeFE1T0VrQ0-xs9h29u5kgRNnboKHr1ABuClKQSpQ1qRP47D_wz6JlgYs6HcIS9HKGtHcheDBy9LZX_lYSLA8ZyX8zknNGcsko9T9dHpmaHtq_3UsoCXgyA7sQnb_TS0YKJsTBIJ91GyLs73Tlv0ouqGByc_VFVuvNx89XH95JSn8B1aOxYA</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>202929215</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Using an explicit guideline-based criterion and implicit review to assess antipsychotic dosing performance for schizophrenia</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>JSTOR Archive Collection A-Z Listing</source><source>Oxford Journals Open Access Collection</source><source>Oxford University Press Journals All Titles (1996-Current)</source><source>EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals</source><creator>OWEN, RICHARD R. ; THRUSH, CAROL R. ; HUDSON, TERESA J. ; MALLORY, SUSAN R. ; FISCHER, ELLEN P. ; CLARDY, JAMES A. ; WILLIAMS, D. KEITH</creator><creatorcontrib>OWEN, RICHARD R. ; THRUSH, CAROL R. ; HUDSON, TERESA J. ; MALLORY, SUSAN R. ; FISCHER, ELLEN P. ; CLARDY, JAMES A. ; WILLIAMS, D. KEITH</creatorcontrib><description>Objective. Using structured implicit review as the gold standard, this study assessed the sensitivity and specificity of an explicit antipsychotic dose criterion derived from schizophrenia guidelines. Design. Two psychiatrists reviewed medical records and made consensus-structured implicit review ratings of the appropriateness of discharge antipsychotic dosages for hospitalized patients who participated in a schizophrenia outcomes study. Structured implicit review ratings were compared with the explicit criterion: whether antipsychotic dose was within the guideline-recommended range of 300–1000 chlorpromazine milligram equivalents (CPZE). In addition, reasons for deviation from guideline dose recommendations were examined. Setting and study participants. A total of 66 patients hospitalized for acute schizophrenia at a Veterans Affairs medical center or state hospital in the southeastern US. Main outcome measures. The sensitivity and specificity of the explicit dose criterion at hospital discharge were determined in comparison with the gold standard of structured implicit review. Results. At hospital discharge, 61% of patients (n= 40) were receiving doses within the guideline-recommended range. According to structured implicit review ratings, antipsychotic dose management was appropriate for 80% (n= 53) of patients. When the 300–1000 CPZE dose criterion (dosage within or outside the recommended range) was compared with structured implicit review, it demonstrated 84.6% sensitivity and 71.7% specificity for detecting inappropriate antipsychotic dose. Conclusions. The explicit antipsychotic dose criterion may provide a useful and efficient screen to identify patients at significant risk for quality of care problems; however, the relatively low specificity suggests that the measure may not be appropriate for quality measurement programs that compare performance among health plans.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1353-4505</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1464-3677</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.intqhc.a002611</identifier><identifier>PMID: 12108530</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>England: Oxford University Press</publisher><subject>Adult ; antipsychotic agents ; Antipsychotic Agents - administration & dosage ; Chlorpromazine - administration & dosage ; Data Collection ; Double-Blind Method ; Drug Utilization - standards ; Evidence-Based Medicine ; guidelines ; Hospitals, State - standards ; Hospitals, Veterans - standards ; Humans ; Medication Systems, Hospital - standards ; Patient Discharge - standards ; Practice Guidelines as Topic ; quality indicators ; Quality Indicators, Health Care ; schizophrenia ; Schizophrenia - drug therapy ; Sensitivity and Specificity ; Southeastern United States</subject><ispartof>International journal for quality in health care, 2002-06, Vol.14 (3), p.199-206</ispartof><rights>International Society for Quality in Health Care and Oxford University Press 2002</rights><rights>Copyright Oxford University Press(England) Jun 2002</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c463t-c7f3fa6a71dfce89d151b1af1d78f48600af95af4680551b1e1c543622bb83973</citedby></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/45125771$$EPDF$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/45125771$$EHTML$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,803,27923,27924,58016,58249</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12108530$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>OWEN, RICHARD R.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>THRUSH, CAROL R.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>HUDSON, TERESA J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>MALLORY, SUSAN R.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>FISCHER, ELLEN P.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>CLARDY, JAMES A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>WILLIAMS, D. KEITH</creatorcontrib><title>Using an explicit guideline-based criterion and implicit review to assess antipsychotic dosing performance for schizophrenia</title><title>International journal for quality in health care</title><addtitle>Int J Qual Health Care</addtitle><description>Objective. Using structured implicit review as the gold standard, this study assessed the sensitivity and specificity of an explicit antipsychotic dose criterion derived from schizophrenia guidelines. Design. Two psychiatrists reviewed medical records and made consensus-structured implicit review ratings of the appropriateness of discharge antipsychotic dosages for hospitalized patients who participated in a schizophrenia outcomes study. Structured implicit review ratings were compared with the explicit criterion: whether antipsychotic dose was within the guideline-recommended range of 300–1000 chlorpromazine milligram equivalents (CPZE). In addition, reasons for deviation from guideline dose recommendations were examined. Setting and study participants. A total of 66 patients hospitalized for acute schizophrenia at a Veterans Affairs medical center or state hospital in the southeastern US. Main outcome measures. The sensitivity and specificity of the explicit dose criterion at hospital discharge were determined in comparison with the gold standard of structured implicit review. Results. At hospital discharge, 61% of patients (n= 40) were receiving doses within the guideline-recommended range. According to structured implicit review ratings, antipsychotic dose management was appropriate for 80% (n= 53) of patients. When the 300–1000 CPZE dose criterion (dosage within or outside the recommended range) was compared with structured implicit review, it demonstrated 84.6% sensitivity and 71.7% specificity for detecting inappropriate antipsychotic dose. Conclusions. The explicit antipsychotic dose criterion may provide a useful and efficient screen to identify patients at significant risk for quality of care problems; however, the relatively low specificity suggests that the measure may not be appropriate for quality measurement programs that compare performance among health plans.</description><subject>Adult</subject><subject>antipsychotic agents</subject><subject>Antipsychotic Agents - administration & dosage</subject><subject>Chlorpromazine - administration & dosage</subject><subject>Data Collection</subject><subject>Double-Blind Method</subject><subject>Drug Utilization - standards</subject><subject>Evidence-Based Medicine</subject><subject>guidelines</subject><subject>Hospitals, State - standards</subject><subject>Hospitals, Veterans - standards</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Medication Systems, Hospital - standards</subject><subject>Patient Discharge - standards</subject><subject>Practice Guidelines as Topic</subject><subject>quality indicators</subject><subject>Quality Indicators, Health Care</subject><subject>schizophrenia</subject><subject>Schizophrenia - drug therapy</subject><subject>Sensitivity and Specificity</subject><subject>Southeastern United States</subject><issn>1353-4505</issn><issn>1464-3677</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2002</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNpdkV-L1DAUxYso7h_9CEoQ3LeOSdMk7YMPy6COuKCIi4svIU1vdjK2TTdJdVb88GZsXVHykAvnd09y78my5wSvCK7pC7c3zrc7N_lBdWFlh3iz1SuFccEJuZcdk5KXOeVC3E81ZTQvGWZH2UkIO4wJp4w_zI5IQXDFKD7Ofl4GO1wjNSDYj53VNqLrybbQ2QHyRgVokfY2grduSFSLbL9gHr5Z-I6iQyoECCGp0Y7hVm9dtBq17rfxCD79t1eDBpQKFPTW_nDj1sNg1aPsgUlDwOPlPs0uX7_6tN7kF-_fvF2fX-S65DTmWhhqFFeCtEZDVbeEkYYoQ1pRmbLiGCtTM2VKXmF2kIBoVlJeFE1T0VrQ0-xs9h29u5kgRNnboKHr1ABuClKQSpQ1qRP47D_wz6JlgYs6HcIS9HKGtHcheDBy9LZX_lYSLA8ZyX8zknNGcsko9T9dHpmaHtq_3UsoCXgyA7sQnb_TS0YKJsTBIJ91GyLs73Tlv0ouqGByc_VFVuvNx89XH95JSn8B1aOxYA</recordid><startdate>20020601</startdate><enddate>20020601</enddate><creator>OWEN, RICHARD R.</creator><creator>THRUSH, CAROL R.</creator><creator>HUDSON, TERESA J.</creator><creator>MALLORY, SUSAN R.</creator><creator>FISCHER, ELLEN P.</creator><creator>CLARDY, JAMES A.</creator><creator>WILLIAMS, D. KEITH</creator><general>Oxford University Press</general><general>OXFORD UNIVERSITY PRESS</general><general>Oxford Publishing Limited (England)</general><scope>BSCLL</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20020601</creationdate><title>Using an explicit guideline-based criterion and implicit review to assess antipsychotic dosing performance for schizophrenia</title><author>OWEN, RICHARD R. ; THRUSH, CAROL R. ; HUDSON, TERESA J. ; MALLORY, SUSAN R. ; FISCHER, ELLEN P. ; CLARDY, JAMES A. ; WILLIAMS, D. KEITH</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c463t-c7f3fa6a71dfce89d151b1af1d78f48600af95af4680551b1e1c543622bb83973</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2002</creationdate><topic>Adult</topic><topic>antipsychotic agents</topic><topic>Antipsychotic Agents - administration & dosage</topic><topic>Chlorpromazine - administration & dosage</topic><topic>Data Collection</topic><topic>Double-Blind Method</topic><topic>Drug Utilization - standards</topic><topic>Evidence-Based Medicine</topic><topic>guidelines</topic><topic>Hospitals, State - standards</topic><topic>Hospitals, Veterans - standards</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Medication Systems, Hospital - standards</topic><topic>Patient Discharge - standards</topic><topic>Practice Guidelines as Topic</topic><topic>quality indicators</topic><topic>Quality Indicators, Health Care</topic><topic>schizophrenia</topic><topic>Schizophrenia - drug therapy</topic><topic>Sensitivity and Specificity</topic><topic>Southeastern United States</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>OWEN, RICHARD R.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>THRUSH, CAROL R.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>HUDSON, TERESA J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>MALLORY, SUSAN R.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>FISCHER, ELLEN P.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>CLARDY, JAMES A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>WILLIAMS, D. KEITH</creatorcontrib><collection>Istex</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>International journal for quality in health care</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>OWEN, RICHARD R.</au><au>THRUSH, CAROL R.</au><au>HUDSON, TERESA J.</au><au>MALLORY, SUSAN R.</au><au>FISCHER, ELLEN P.</au><au>CLARDY, JAMES A.</au><au>WILLIAMS, D. KEITH</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Using an explicit guideline-based criterion and implicit review to assess antipsychotic dosing performance for schizophrenia</atitle><jtitle>International journal for quality in health care</jtitle><addtitle>Int J Qual Health Care</addtitle><date>2002-06-01</date><risdate>2002</risdate><volume>14</volume><issue>3</issue><spage>199</spage><epage>206</epage><pages>199-206</pages><issn>1353-4505</issn><eissn>1464-3677</eissn><abstract>Objective. Using structured implicit review as the gold standard, this study assessed the sensitivity and specificity of an explicit antipsychotic dose criterion derived from schizophrenia guidelines. Design. Two psychiatrists reviewed medical records and made consensus-structured implicit review ratings of the appropriateness of discharge antipsychotic dosages for hospitalized patients who participated in a schizophrenia outcomes study. Structured implicit review ratings were compared with the explicit criterion: whether antipsychotic dose was within the guideline-recommended range of 300–1000 chlorpromazine milligram equivalents (CPZE). In addition, reasons for deviation from guideline dose recommendations were examined. Setting and study participants. A total of 66 patients hospitalized for acute schizophrenia at a Veterans Affairs medical center or state hospital in the southeastern US. Main outcome measures. The sensitivity and specificity of the explicit dose criterion at hospital discharge were determined in comparison with the gold standard of structured implicit review. Results. At hospital discharge, 61% of patients (n= 40) were receiving doses within the guideline-recommended range. According to structured implicit review ratings, antipsychotic dose management was appropriate for 80% (n= 53) of patients. When the 300–1000 CPZE dose criterion (dosage within or outside the recommended range) was compared with structured implicit review, it demonstrated 84.6% sensitivity and 71.7% specificity for detecting inappropriate antipsychotic dose. Conclusions. The explicit antipsychotic dose criterion may provide a useful and efficient screen to identify patients at significant risk for quality of care problems; however, the relatively low specificity suggests that the measure may not be appropriate for quality measurement programs that compare performance among health plans.</abstract><cop>England</cop><pub>Oxford University Press</pub><pmid>12108530</pmid><doi>10.1093/oxfordjournals.intqhc.a002611</doi><tpages>8</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 1353-4505 |
ispartof | International journal for quality in health care, 2002-06, Vol.14 (3), p.199-206 |
issn | 1353-4505 1464-3677 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_71874919 |
source | MEDLINE; JSTOR Archive Collection A-Z Listing; Oxford Journals Open Access Collection; Oxford University Press Journals All Titles (1996-Current); EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals |
subjects | Adult antipsychotic agents Antipsychotic Agents - administration & dosage Chlorpromazine - administration & dosage Data Collection Double-Blind Method Drug Utilization - standards Evidence-Based Medicine guidelines Hospitals, State - standards Hospitals, Veterans - standards Humans Medication Systems, Hospital - standards Patient Discharge - standards Practice Guidelines as Topic quality indicators Quality Indicators, Health Care schizophrenia Schizophrenia - drug therapy Sensitivity and Specificity Southeastern United States |
title | Using an explicit guideline-based criterion and implicit review to assess antipsychotic dosing performance for schizophrenia |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-12T03%3A37%3A18IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-jstor_proqu&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Using%20an%20explicit%20guideline-based%20criterion%20and%20implicit%20review%20to%20assess%20antipsychotic%20dosing%20performance%20for%20schizophrenia&rft.jtitle=International%20journal%20for%20quality%20in%20health%20care&rft.au=OWEN,%20RICHARD%20R.&rft.date=2002-06-01&rft.volume=14&rft.issue=3&rft.spage=199&rft.epage=206&rft.pages=199-206&rft.issn=1353-4505&rft.eissn=1464-3677&rft_id=info:doi/10.1093/oxfordjournals.intqhc.a002611&rft_dat=%3Cjstor_proqu%3E45125771%3C/jstor_proqu%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=202929215&rft_id=info:pmid/12108530&rft_jstor_id=45125771&rfr_iscdi=true |