A Systematic Review of Electronic Medical Record Driven Quality Measurement and Feedback Systems
Historically, quality measurement analyses utilize manual chart abstraction from data collected primarily for administrative purposes. These methods are resource-intensive, time-delayed, and often lack clinical relevance. Electronic Medical Records (EMRs) have increased data availability and opportu...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | International journal of environmental research and public health 2022-12, Vol.20 (1), p.200 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 1 |
| container_start_page | 200 |
| container_title | International journal of environmental research and public health |
| container_volume | 20 |
| creator | Donnelly, Candice Janssen, Anna Vinod, Shalini Stone, Emily Harnett, Paul Shaw, Tim |
| description | Historically, quality measurement analyses utilize manual chart abstraction from data collected primarily for administrative purposes. These methods are resource-intensive, time-delayed, and often lack clinical relevance. Electronic Medical Records (EMRs) have increased data availability and opportunities for quality measurement. However, little is known about the effectiveness of Measurement Feedback Systems (MFSs) in utilizing EMR data. This study explores the effectiveness and characteristics of EMR-enabled MFSs in tertiary care. The search strategy guided by the PICO Framework was executed in four databases. Two reviewers screened abstracts and manuscripts. Data on effect and intervention characteristics were extracted using a tailored version of the Cochrane EPOC abstraction tool. Due to study heterogeneity, a narrative synthesis was conducted and reported according to PRISMA guidelines. A total of 14 unique MFS studies were extracted and synthesized, of which 12 had positive effects on outcomes. Findings indicate that quality measurement using EMR data is feasible in certain contexts and successful MFSs often incorporated electronic feedback methods, supported by clinical leadership and action planning. EMR-enabled MFSs have the potential to reduce the burden of data collection for quality measurement but further research is needed to evaluate EMR-enabled MFSs to translate and scale findings to broader implementation contexts. |
| doi_str_mv | 10.3390/ijerph20010200 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_9819986</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2761185903</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c418t-2d1d861ac934153d097d9b849b940b068c1f8e42aa6760ddda9a4bf0c68797773</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpdkc1PGzEQxS1UBIFy5YhW6qWXgL12_HFBQmmASiAELWfjtWeJw-46tXdT5b_HlBQBF4817zdPM3oIHRJ8TKnCJ34BcTkvMSY4P1toRDjHY8Yx-fLuv4v2UlpgTCXjagftUs5JOSnLEXo4K36tUw-t6b0t7mDl4W8R6mLWgO1j6HLzGpy3psmiDdEVP6JfQVfcDqbx_TqrJg0RWuj6wnSuOAdwlbFPG9v0FW3XpklwsKn76P589nt6Ob66ufg5PbsaW0ZkPy4dcZITYxVlZEIdVsKpSjJVKYYrzKUltQRWGsMFx845owyramy5FEoIQffR6avvcqhacDbvE02jl9G3Jq51MF5_VDo_149hpZUkSkmeDb5vDGL4M0DqdeuThaYxHYQh6VJwogRToszot0_oIgyxy-f9o4icKEwzdfxK2RhSilC_LUOwfglPfwwvDxy9P-EN_58WfQaLS5aq</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2761185903</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>A Systematic Review of Electronic Medical Record Driven Quality Measurement and Feedback Systems</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>PubMed Central Open Access</source><source>MDPI - Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute</source><source>EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals</source><source>PubMed Central</source><source>Free Full-Text Journals in Chemistry</source><creator>Donnelly, Candice ; Janssen, Anna ; Vinod, Shalini ; Stone, Emily ; Harnett, Paul ; Shaw, Tim</creator><creatorcontrib>Donnelly, Candice ; Janssen, Anna ; Vinod, Shalini ; Stone, Emily ; Harnett, Paul ; Shaw, Tim</creatorcontrib><description>Historically, quality measurement analyses utilize manual chart abstraction from data collected primarily for administrative purposes. These methods are resource-intensive, time-delayed, and often lack clinical relevance. Electronic Medical Records (EMRs) have increased data availability and opportunities for quality measurement. However, little is known about the effectiveness of Measurement Feedback Systems (MFSs) in utilizing EMR data. This study explores the effectiveness and characteristics of EMR-enabled MFSs in tertiary care. The search strategy guided by the PICO Framework was executed in four databases. Two reviewers screened abstracts and manuscripts. Data on effect and intervention characteristics were extracted using a tailored version of the Cochrane EPOC abstraction tool. Due to study heterogeneity, a narrative synthesis was conducted and reported according to PRISMA guidelines. A total of 14 unique MFS studies were extracted and synthesized, of which 12 had positive effects on outcomes. Findings indicate that quality measurement using EMR data is feasible in certain contexts and successful MFSs often incorporated electronic feedback methods, supported by clinical leadership and action planning. EMR-enabled MFSs have the potential to reduce the burden of data collection for quality measurement but further research is needed to evaluate EMR-enabled MFSs to translate and scale findings to broader implementation contexts.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1660-4601</identifier><identifier>ISSN: 1661-7827</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1660-4601</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.3390/ijerph20010200</identifier><identifier>PMID: 36612522</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Switzerland: MDPI AG</publisher><subject>Audits ; Citation management software ; Clinical decision making ; Clinical outcomes ; Data collection ; Databases, Factual ; Delivery of Health Care ; Electronic Health Records ; Electronic medical records ; Feedback ; Health services ; Heterogeneity ; Intervention ; Leadership ; Medical personnel ; Medical records ; Primary care ; Quality assessment ; Quality improvement ; System effectiveness ; Systematic Review</subject><ispartof>International journal of environmental research and public health, 2022-12, Vol.20 (1), p.200</ispartof><rights>2022 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.</rights><rights>2022 by the authors. 2022</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c418t-2d1d861ac934153d097d9b849b940b068c1f8e42aa6760ddda9a4bf0c68797773</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c418t-2d1d861ac934153d097d9b849b940b068c1f8e42aa6760ddda9a4bf0c68797773</cites><orcidid>0000-0001-8075-6219 ; 0000-0003-4398-2908 ; 0000-0001-6611-9651</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9819986/pdf/$$EPDF$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9819986/$$EHTML$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,727,780,784,885,27924,27925,53791,53793</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36612522$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Donnelly, Candice</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Janssen, Anna</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Vinod, Shalini</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Stone, Emily</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Harnett, Paul</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Shaw, Tim</creatorcontrib><title>A Systematic Review of Electronic Medical Record Driven Quality Measurement and Feedback Systems</title><title>International journal of environmental research and public health</title><addtitle>Int J Environ Res Public Health</addtitle><description>Historically, quality measurement analyses utilize manual chart abstraction from data collected primarily for administrative purposes. These methods are resource-intensive, time-delayed, and often lack clinical relevance. Electronic Medical Records (EMRs) have increased data availability and opportunities for quality measurement. However, little is known about the effectiveness of Measurement Feedback Systems (MFSs) in utilizing EMR data. This study explores the effectiveness and characteristics of EMR-enabled MFSs in tertiary care. The search strategy guided by the PICO Framework was executed in four databases. Two reviewers screened abstracts and manuscripts. Data on effect and intervention characteristics were extracted using a tailored version of the Cochrane EPOC abstraction tool. Due to study heterogeneity, a narrative synthesis was conducted and reported according to PRISMA guidelines. A total of 14 unique MFS studies were extracted and synthesized, of which 12 had positive effects on outcomes. Findings indicate that quality measurement using EMR data is feasible in certain contexts and successful MFSs often incorporated electronic feedback methods, supported by clinical leadership and action planning. EMR-enabled MFSs have the potential to reduce the burden of data collection for quality measurement but further research is needed to evaluate EMR-enabled MFSs to translate and scale findings to broader implementation contexts.</description><subject>Audits</subject><subject>Citation management software</subject><subject>Clinical decision making</subject><subject>Clinical outcomes</subject><subject>Data collection</subject><subject>Databases, Factual</subject><subject>Delivery of Health Care</subject><subject>Electronic Health Records</subject><subject>Electronic medical records</subject><subject>Feedback</subject><subject>Health services</subject><subject>Heterogeneity</subject><subject>Intervention</subject><subject>Leadership</subject><subject>Medical personnel</subject><subject>Medical records</subject><subject>Primary care</subject><subject>Quality assessment</subject><subject>Quality improvement</subject><subject>System effectiveness</subject><subject>Systematic Review</subject><issn>1660-4601</issn><issn>1661-7827</issn><issn>1660-4601</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2022</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><recordid>eNpdkc1PGzEQxS1UBIFy5YhW6qWXgL12_HFBQmmASiAELWfjtWeJw-46tXdT5b_HlBQBF4817zdPM3oIHRJ8TKnCJ34BcTkvMSY4P1toRDjHY8Yx-fLuv4v2UlpgTCXjagftUs5JOSnLEXo4K36tUw-t6b0t7mDl4W8R6mLWgO1j6HLzGpy3psmiDdEVP6JfQVfcDqbx_TqrJg0RWuj6wnSuOAdwlbFPG9v0FW3XpklwsKn76P589nt6Ob66ufg5PbsaW0ZkPy4dcZITYxVlZEIdVsKpSjJVKYYrzKUltQRWGsMFx845owyramy5FEoIQffR6avvcqhacDbvE02jl9G3Jq51MF5_VDo_149hpZUkSkmeDb5vDGL4M0DqdeuThaYxHYQh6VJwogRToszot0_oIgyxy-f9o4icKEwzdfxK2RhSilC_LUOwfglPfwwvDxy9P-EN_58WfQaLS5aq</recordid><startdate>20221223</startdate><enddate>20221223</enddate><creator>Donnelly, Candice</creator><creator>Janssen, Anna</creator><creator>Vinod, Shalini</creator><creator>Stone, Emily</creator><creator>Harnett, Paul</creator><creator>Shaw, Tim</creator><general>MDPI AG</general><general>MDPI</general><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>8C1</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>PIMPY</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8075-6219</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4398-2908</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6611-9651</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20221223</creationdate><title>A Systematic Review of Electronic Medical Record Driven Quality Measurement and Feedback Systems</title><author>Donnelly, Candice ; Janssen, Anna ; Vinod, Shalini ; Stone, Emily ; Harnett, Paul ; Shaw, Tim</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c418t-2d1d861ac934153d097d9b849b940b068c1f8e42aa6760ddda9a4bf0c68797773</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2022</creationdate><topic>Audits</topic><topic>Citation management software</topic><topic>Clinical decision making</topic><topic>Clinical outcomes</topic><topic>Data collection</topic><topic>Databases, Factual</topic><topic>Delivery of Health Care</topic><topic>Electronic Health Records</topic><topic>Electronic medical records</topic><topic>Feedback</topic><topic>Health services</topic><topic>Heterogeneity</topic><topic>Intervention</topic><topic>Leadership</topic><topic>Medical personnel</topic><topic>Medical records</topic><topic>Primary care</topic><topic>Quality assessment</topic><topic>Quality improvement</topic><topic>System effectiveness</topic><topic>Systematic Review</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Donnelly, Candice</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Janssen, Anna</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Vinod, Shalini</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Stone, Emily</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Harnett, Paul</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Shaw, Tim</creatorcontrib><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 & Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Public Health Database</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>ProQuest Central</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 Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>Publicly Available Content 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>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><jtitle>International journal of environmental research and public health</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Donnelly, Candice</au><au>Janssen, Anna</au><au>Vinod, Shalini</au><au>Stone, Emily</au><au>Harnett, Paul</au><au>Shaw, Tim</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>A Systematic Review of Electronic Medical Record Driven Quality Measurement and Feedback Systems</atitle><jtitle>International journal of environmental research and public health</jtitle><addtitle>Int J Environ Res Public Health</addtitle><date>2022-12-23</date><risdate>2022</risdate><volume>20</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>200</spage><pages>200-</pages><issn>1660-4601</issn><issn>1661-7827</issn><eissn>1660-4601</eissn><abstract>Historically, quality measurement analyses utilize manual chart abstraction from data collected primarily for administrative purposes. These methods are resource-intensive, time-delayed, and often lack clinical relevance. Electronic Medical Records (EMRs) have increased data availability and opportunities for quality measurement. However, little is known about the effectiveness of Measurement Feedback Systems (MFSs) in utilizing EMR data. This study explores the effectiveness and characteristics of EMR-enabled MFSs in tertiary care. The search strategy guided by the PICO Framework was executed in four databases. Two reviewers screened abstracts and manuscripts. Data on effect and intervention characteristics were extracted using a tailored version of the Cochrane EPOC abstraction tool. Due to study heterogeneity, a narrative synthesis was conducted and reported according to PRISMA guidelines. A total of 14 unique MFS studies were extracted and synthesized, of which 12 had positive effects on outcomes. Findings indicate that quality measurement using EMR data is feasible in certain contexts and successful MFSs often incorporated electronic feedback methods, supported by clinical leadership and action planning. EMR-enabled MFSs have the potential to reduce the burden of data collection for quality measurement but further research is needed to evaluate EMR-enabled MFSs to translate and scale findings to broader implementation contexts.</abstract><cop>Switzerland</cop><pub>MDPI AG</pub><pmid>36612522</pmid><doi>10.3390/ijerph20010200</doi><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8075-6219</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4398-2908</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6611-9651</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 1660-4601 |
| ispartof | International journal of environmental research and public health, 2022-12, Vol.20 (1), p.200 |
| issn | 1660-4601 1661-7827 1660-4601 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_9819986 |
| source | MEDLINE; PubMed Central Open Access; MDPI - Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute; EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals; PubMed Central; Free Full-Text Journals in Chemistry |
| subjects | Audits Citation management software Clinical decision making Clinical outcomes Data collection Databases, Factual Delivery of Health Care Electronic Health Records Electronic medical records Feedback Health services Heterogeneity Intervention Leadership Medical personnel Medical records Primary care Quality assessment Quality improvement System effectiveness Systematic Review |
| title | A Systematic Review of Electronic Medical Record Driven Quality Measurement and Feedback Systems |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-02T08%3A38%3A23IST&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=A%20Systematic%20Review%20of%20Electronic%20Medical%20Record%20Driven%20Quality%20Measurement%20and%20Feedback%20Systems&rft.jtitle=International%20journal%20of%20environmental%20research%20and%20public%20health&rft.au=Donnelly,%20Candice&rft.date=2022-12-23&rft.volume=20&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=200&rft.pages=200-&rft.issn=1660-4601&rft.eissn=1660-4601&rft_id=info:doi/10.3390/ijerph20010200&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_pubme%3E2761185903%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=2761185903&rft_id=info:pmid/36612522&rfr_iscdi=true |