Measuring quality of care for rheumatic diseases using an electronic medical record

Objectives:The objective of this study was twofold: (1) to determine how best to measure adherence with time-dependent quality indicators (QIs) related to laboratory monitoring, and (2) to assess the accuracy and efficiency of gathering QI adherence information from an electronic medical record (EMR...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Annals of the rheumatic diseases 2009-05, Vol.68 (5), p.680-684
Hauptverfasser: Agnew-Blais, J C, Coblyn, J S, Katz, J N, Anderson, R J, Mehta, J, Solomon, D H
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 684
container_issue 5
container_start_page 680
container_title Annals of the rheumatic diseases
container_volume 68
creator Agnew-Blais, J C
Coblyn, J S
Katz, J N
Anderson, R J
Mehta, J
Solomon, D H
description Objectives:The objective of this study was twofold: (1) to determine how best to measure adherence with time-dependent quality indicators (QIs) related to laboratory monitoring, and (2) to assess the accuracy and efficiency of gathering QI adherence information from an electronic medical record (EMR).Methods:A random sample of 100 patients were selected who had at least three visits with the diagnosis of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) at Brigham and Women’s Hospital Arthritis Center in 2005. Using the EMR, it was determined whether patients had been prescribed a disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (DMARD) (QI #1) and if patients starting therapy received appropriate baseline laboratory testing (QI #2). For patients consistently prescribed a DMARD, adherence with follow-up testing (QI #3) was calculated using three different methods, the Calendar, Interval and Rolling Interval Methods.Results:It was found that 97% of patients were prescribed a DMARD (QI #1) and baseline tests were completed in 50% of patients (QI #2). For follow-up testing (QI #3), mean adherence was 60% for the Calendar Method, 35% for the Interval Method, and 48% for the Rolling Interval Method. Using the Rolling Interval Method, adherence rates were similar across drug and laboratory testing type.Conclusions:Results for adherence with laboratory testing QIs for DMARD use differed depending on how the QIs were measured, suggesting that care must be taken in clearly defining methods. While EMRs will provide important opportunities for measuring adherence with QIs, they also present challenges that must be examined before widespread adoption of these data collection methods.
doi_str_mv 10.1136/ard.2008.089318
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_2924631</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>67129661</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-b522t-331a0659fb1e7ffca89415a99ab435010641a29c504bc5d081f79f9b57133b4a3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFkc1rFTEUxYMo9lldu5MBsQthXvMx-doI8qhVaXVRdRvuZJI2z5lJm8yI_e_NYx7Pj40QCOH8cjj3HoSeE7wmhIlTSN2aYqzWWGlG1AO0Io1QNcUCP0QrjDGrGy3kEXqS87Y8sSLqMToiihPCG7lCV5cO8pzCeF3dzdCH6b6KvrKQXOVjqtKNmweYgq26kAvpcjXnHQxj5XpnpxTHIg6uCxb6KjkbU_cUPfLQZ_dsfx-jr-_Ovmze1xefzz9s3l7ULad0qhkjgAXXviVOem9B6YZw0BrahnFMsGgIUG05blrLuxLdS-11yyVhrG2AHaM3i-_t3JYE1o1Tgt7cpjBAujcRgvlbGcONuY4_DNW0EYwUg5O9QYp3s8uTGUK2ru9hdHHORkhCtRA78OU_4DbOaSzDGSKlVLwcVajThbIp5pycP0Qh2OzqMqUus6vLLHWVHy_-nOA3v--nAK_2AOSyYJ9gtCEfOFo2ganEhasXLuTJ_TzokL6XIZjk5tO3jTn_eEnY1YYbXfjXC98O2_-m_AW85LnG</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1777857858</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Measuring quality of care for rheumatic diseases using an electronic medical record</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>BMJ Journals - NESLi2</source><creator>Agnew-Blais, J C ; Coblyn, J S ; Katz, J N ; Anderson, R J ; Mehta, J ; Solomon, D H</creator><creatorcontrib>Agnew-Blais, J C ; Coblyn, J S ; Katz, J N ; Anderson, R J ; Mehta, J ; Solomon, D H</creatorcontrib><description>Objectives:The objective of this study was twofold: (1) to determine how best to measure adherence with time-dependent quality indicators (QIs) related to laboratory monitoring, and (2) to assess the accuracy and efficiency of gathering QI adherence information from an electronic medical record (EMR).Methods:A random sample of 100 patients were selected who had at least three visits with the diagnosis of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) at Brigham and Women’s Hospital Arthritis Center in 2005. Using the EMR, it was determined whether patients had been prescribed a disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (DMARD) (QI #1) and if patients starting therapy received appropriate baseline laboratory testing (QI #2). For patients consistently prescribed a DMARD, adherence with follow-up testing (QI #3) was calculated using three different methods, the Calendar, Interval and Rolling Interval Methods.Results:It was found that 97% of patients were prescribed a DMARD (QI #1) and baseline tests were completed in 50% of patients (QI #2). For follow-up testing (QI #3), mean adherence was 60% for the Calendar Method, 35% for the Interval Method, and 48% for the Rolling Interval Method. Using the Rolling Interval Method, adherence rates were similar across drug and laboratory testing type.Conclusions:Results for adherence with laboratory testing QIs for DMARD use differed depending on how the QIs were measured, suggesting that care must be taken in clearly defining methods. While EMRs will provide important opportunities for measuring adherence with QIs, they also present challenges that must be examined before widespread adoption of these data collection methods.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0003-4967</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1468-2060</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1136/ard.2008.089318</identifier><identifier>PMID: 18511547</identifier><identifier>CODEN: ARDIAO</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>London: BMJ Publishing Group Ltd and European League Against Rheumatism</publisher><subject>Antirheumatic Agents - therapeutic use ; Arthritis, Rheumatoid - drug therapy ; Biological and medical sciences ; Calendars ; Diseases of the osteoarticular system ; Drug Monitoring - methods ; Drug Monitoring - standards ; Drug Prescriptions - standards ; Drug Utilization - standards ; Female ; Guideline Adherence - standards ; Hospitals ; Humans ; Laboratories ; Male ; Massachusetts ; Medical records ; Medical Records Systems, Computerized ; Medical sciences ; Medicare ; Methods ; Middle Aged ; Miscellaneous. Osteoarticular involvement in other diseases ; Patients ; Quality Indicators, Health Care ; Quality of Health Care ; Rheumatoid arthritis ; Rheumatology ; Studies</subject><ispartof>Annals of the rheumatic diseases, 2009-05, Vol.68 (5), p.680-684</ispartof><rights>2009 BMJ Publishing Group and European League Against Rheumatism</rights><rights>2009 INIST-CNRS</rights><rights>Copyright: 2009 2009 BMJ Publishing Group and European League Against Rheumatism</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-b522t-331a0659fb1e7ffca89415a99ab435010641a29c504bc5d081f79f9b57133b4a3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-b522t-331a0659fb1e7ffca89415a99ab435010641a29c504bc5d081f79f9b57133b4a3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttp://ard.bmj.com/content/68/5/680.full.pdf$$EPDF$$P50$$Gbmj$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttp://ard.bmj.com/content/68/5/680.full$$EHTML$$P50$$Gbmj$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>114,115,230,314,776,780,881,3183,23550,27901,27902,77342,77373</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&amp;idt=21330270$$DView record in Pascal Francis$$Hfree_for_read</backlink><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18511547$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Agnew-Blais, J C</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Coblyn, J S</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Katz, J N</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Anderson, R J</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mehta, J</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Solomon, D H</creatorcontrib><title>Measuring quality of care for rheumatic diseases using an electronic medical record</title><title>Annals of the rheumatic diseases</title><addtitle>Ann Rheum Dis</addtitle><description>Objectives:The objective of this study was twofold: (1) to determine how best to measure adherence with time-dependent quality indicators (QIs) related to laboratory monitoring, and (2) to assess the accuracy and efficiency of gathering QI adherence information from an electronic medical record (EMR).Methods:A random sample of 100 patients were selected who had at least three visits with the diagnosis of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) at Brigham and Women’s Hospital Arthritis Center in 2005. Using the EMR, it was determined whether patients had been prescribed a disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (DMARD) (QI #1) and if patients starting therapy received appropriate baseline laboratory testing (QI #2). For patients consistently prescribed a DMARD, adherence with follow-up testing (QI #3) was calculated using three different methods, the Calendar, Interval and Rolling Interval Methods.Results:It was found that 97% of patients were prescribed a DMARD (QI #1) and baseline tests were completed in 50% of patients (QI #2). For follow-up testing (QI #3), mean adherence was 60% for the Calendar Method, 35% for the Interval Method, and 48% for the Rolling Interval Method. Using the Rolling Interval Method, adherence rates were similar across drug and laboratory testing type.Conclusions:Results for adherence with laboratory testing QIs for DMARD use differed depending on how the QIs were measured, suggesting that care must be taken in clearly defining methods. While EMRs will provide important opportunities for measuring adherence with QIs, they also present challenges that must be examined before widespread adoption of these data collection methods.</description><subject>Antirheumatic Agents - therapeutic use</subject><subject>Arthritis, Rheumatoid - drug therapy</subject><subject>Biological and medical sciences</subject><subject>Calendars</subject><subject>Diseases of the osteoarticular system</subject><subject>Drug Monitoring - methods</subject><subject>Drug Monitoring - standards</subject><subject>Drug Prescriptions - standards</subject><subject>Drug Utilization - standards</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Guideline Adherence - standards</subject><subject>Hospitals</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Laboratories</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Massachusetts</subject><subject>Medical records</subject><subject>Medical Records Systems, Computerized</subject><subject>Medical sciences</subject><subject>Medicare</subject><subject>Methods</subject><subject>Middle Aged</subject><subject>Miscellaneous. Osteoarticular involvement in other diseases</subject><subject>Patients</subject><subject>Quality Indicators, Health Care</subject><subject>Quality of Health Care</subject><subject>Rheumatoid arthritis</subject><subject>Rheumatology</subject><subject>Studies</subject><issn>0003-4967</issn><issn>1468-2060</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2009</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><recordid>eNqFkc1rFTEUxYMo9lldu5MBsQthXvMx-doI8qhVaXVRdRvuZJI2z5lJm8yI_e_NYx7Pj40QCOH8cjj3HoSeE7wmhIlTSN2aYqzWWGlG1AO0Io1QNcUCP0QrjDGrGy3kEXqS87Y8sSLqMToiihPCG7lCV5cO8pzCeF3dzdCH6b6KvrKQXOVjqtKNmweYgq26kAvpcjXnHQxj5XpnpxTHIg6uCxb6KjkbU_cUPfLQZ_dsfx-jr-_Ovmze1xefzz9s3l7ULad0qhkjgAXXviVOem9B6YZw0BrahnFMsGgIUG05blrLuxLdS-11yyVhrG2AHaM3i-_t3JYE1o1Tgt7cpjBAujcRgvlbGcONuY4_DNW0EYwUg5O9QYp3s8uTGUK2ru9hdHHORkhCtRA78OU_4DbOaSzDGSKlVLwcVajThbIp5pycP0Qh2OzqMqUus6vLLHWVHy_-nOA3v--nAK_2AOSyYJ9gtCEfOFo2ganEhasXLuTJ_TzokL6XIZjk5tO3jTn_eEnY1YYbXfjXC98O2_-m_AW85LnG</recordid><startdate>20090501</startdate><enddate>20090501</enddate><creator>Agnew-Blais, J C</creator><creator>Coblyn, J S</creator><creator>Katz, J N</creator><creator>Anderson, R J</creator><creator>Mehta, J</creator><creator>Solomon, D H</creator><general>BMJ Publishing Group Ltd and European League Against Rheumatism</general><general>BMJ Publishing Group</general><general>Elsevier Limited</general><scope>BSCLL</scope><scope>IQODW</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>3V.</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>88I</scope><scope>8AF</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>BTHHO</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>K9-</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>LK8</scope><scope>M0R</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>M2P</scope><scope>M7P</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20090501</creationdate><title>Measuring quality of care for rheumatic diseases using an electronic medical record</title><author>Agnew-Blais, J C ; Coblyn, J S ; Katz, J N ; Anderson, R J ; Mehta, J ; Solomon, D H</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-b522t-331a0659fb1e7ffca89415a99ab435010641a29c504bc5d081f79f9b57133b4a3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2009</creationdate><topic>Antirheumatic Agents - therapeutic use</topic><topic>Arthritis, Rheumatoid - drug therapy</topic><topic>Biological and medical sciences</topic><topic>Calendars</topic><topic>Diseases of the osteoarticular system</topic><topic>Drug Monitoring - methods</topic><topic>Drug Monitoring - standards</topic><topic>Drug Prescriptions - standards</topic><topic>Drug Utilization - standards</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Guideline Adherence - standards</topic><topic>Hospitals</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Laboratories</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Massachusetts</topic><topic>Medical records</topic><topic>Medical Records Systems, Computerized</topic><topic>Medical sciences</topic><topic>Medicare</topic><topic>Methods</topic><topic>Middle Aged</topic><topic>Miscellaneous. Osteoarticular involvement in other diseases</topic><topic>Patients</topic><topic>Quality Indicators, Health Care</topic><topic>Quality of Health Care</topic><topic>Rheumatoid arthritis</topic><topic>Rheumatology</topic><topic>Studies</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Agnew-Blais, J C</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Coblyn, J S</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Katz, J N</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Anderson, R J</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mehta, J</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Solomon, D H</creatorcontrib><collection>Istex</collection><collection>Pascal-Francis</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 Central (Corporate)</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 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>BMJ Journals</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>Consumer Health Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Health &amp; Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>Consumer Health Database</collection><collection>Health &amp; Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>Science Database</collection><collection>Biological Science Database</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><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><jtitle>Annals of the rheumatic diseases</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Agnew-Blais, J C</au><au>Coblyn, J S</au><au>Katz, J N</au><au>Anderson, R J</au><au>Mehta, J</au><au>Solomon, D H</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Measuring quality of care for rheumatic diseases using an electronic medical record</atitle><jtitle>Annals of the rheumatic diseases</jtitle><addtitle>Ann Rheum Dis</addtitle><date>2009-05-01</date><risdate>2009</risdate><volume>68</volume><issue>5</issue><spage>680</spage><epage>684</epage><pages>680-684</pages><issn>0003-4967</issn><eissn>1468-2060</eissn><coden>ARDIAO</coden><abstract>Objectives:The objective of this study was twofold: (1) to determine how best to measure adherence with time-dependent quality indicators (QIs) related to laboratory monitoring, and (2) to assess the accuracy and efficiency of gathering QI adherence information from an electronic medical record (EMR).Methods:A random sample of 100 patients were selected who had at least three visits with the diagnosis of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) at Brigham and Women’s Hospital Arthritis Center in 2005. Using the EMR, it was determined whether patients had been prescribed a disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (DMARD) (QI #1) and if patients starting therapy received appropriate baseline laboratory testing (QI #2). For patients consistently prescribed a DMARD, adherence with follow-up testing (QI #3) was calculated using three different methods, the Calendar, Interval and Rolling Interval Methods.Results:It was found that 97% of patients were prescribed a DMARD (QI #1) and baseline tests were completed in 50% of patients (QI #2). For follow-up testing (QI #3), mean adherence was 60% for the Calendar Method, 35% for the Interval Method, and 48% for the Rolling Interval Method. Using the Rolling Interval Method, adherence rates were similar across drug and laboratory testing type.Conclusions:Results for adherence with laboratory testing QIs for DMARD use differed depending on how the QIs were measured, suggesting that care must be taken in clearly defining methods. While EMRs will provide important opportunities for measuring adherence with QIs, they also present challenges that must be examined before widespread adoption of these data collection methods.</abstract><cop>London</cop><pub>BMJ Publishing Group Ltd and European League Against Rheumatism</pub><pmid>18511547</pmid><doi>10.1136/ard.2008.089318</doi><tpages>5</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0003-4967
ispartof Annals of the rheumatic diseases, 2009-05, Vol.68 (5), p.680-684
issn 0003-4967
1468-2060
language eng
recordid cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_2924631
source MEDLINE; BMJ Journals - NESLi2
subjects Antirheumatic Agents - therapeutic use
Arthritis, Rheumatoid - drug therapy
Biological and medical sciences
Calendars
Diseases of the osteoarticular system
Drug Monitoring - methods
Drug Monitoring - standards
Drug Prescriptions - standards
Drug Utilization - standards
Female
Guideline Adherence - standards
Hospitals
Humans
Laboratories
Male
Massachusetts
Medical records
Medical Records Systems, Computerized
Medical sciences
Medicare
Methods
Middle Aged
Miscellaneous. Osteoarticular involvement in other diseases
Patients
Quality Indicators, Health Care
Quality of Health Care
Rheumatoid arthritis
Rheumatology
Studies
title Measuring quality of care for rheumatic diseases using an electronic medical record
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-09T13%3A37%3A07IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Measuring%20quality%20of%20care%20for%20rheumatic%20diseases%20using%20an%20electronic%20medical%20record&rft.jtitle=Annals%20of%20the%20rheumatic%20diseases&rft.au=Agnew-Blais,%20J%20C&rft.date=2009-05-01&rft.volume=68&rft.issue=5&rft.spage=680&rft.epage=684&rft.pages=680-684&rft.issn=0003-4967&rft.eissn=1468-2060&rft.coden=ARDIAO&rft_id=info:doi/10.1136/ard.2008.089318&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_pubme%3E67129661%3C/proquest_pubme%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1777857858&rft_id=info:pmid/18511547&rfr_iscdi=true