Improving completeness of electronic problem lists through clinical decision support: a randomized, controlled trial

Background: Accurate clinical problem lists are critical for patient care, clinical decision support, population reporting, quality improvement, and research. However, problem lists are often incomplete or out of date. Objective: To determine whether a clinical alerting system, which uses inference rules to notify providers of undocumented problems, improves problem list documentation. Study Design and Methods: Inference rules for 17 conditions were constructed and an electronic health record-based intervention was evaluated to improve problem documentation. A cluster randomized trial was conducted of 11 participating clinics affiliated with a large academic medical center, totaling 28 primary care clinical areas, with 14 receiving the intervention and 14 as controls. The intervention was a clinical alert directed to the provider that suggested adding a problem to the electronic problem list based on inference rules. The primary outcome measure was acceptance of the alert. The number of study problems added in each arm as a pre-specified secondary outcome was also assessed. Data were collected during 6-month pre-intervention (11/2009–5/2010) and intervention (5/2010–11/2010) periods. Results: 17,043 alerts were presented, of which 41.1% were accepted. In the intervention arm, providers documented significantly more study problems (adjusted OR=3.4, p<0.001), with an absolute difference of 6,277 additional problems. In the intervention group, 70.4% of all study problems were added via the problem list alerts. Significant increases in problem notation were observed for 13 of 17 conditions. Conclusion: Problem inference alerts significantly increase notation of important patient problems in primary care, which in turn has the potential to facilitate quality improvement

Assessing the accuracy of an inter-institutional automated patient-specific health problem list

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Health problem lists are a key component of electronic health records and are instrumental in the development of decision-support systems that encourage best practices and optimal patient safety. Most health problem lists require initial clinical information to be entered manually and few integrate information across care providers and institutions. This study assesses the accuracy of a novel approach to create an inter-institutional automated health problem list in a computerized medical record (MOXXI) that integrates three sources of information for an individual patient: diagnostic codes from medical services claims from all treating physicians, therapeutic indications from electronic prescriptions, and single-indication drugs.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Data for this study were obtained from 121 general practitioners and all medical services provided for 22,248 of their patients. At the opening of a patient's file, all health problems detected through medical service utilization or single-indication drug use were flagged to the physician in the MOXXI system. Each new arising health problem were presented as 'potential' and physicians were prompted to specify if the health problem was valid (Y) or not (N) or if they preferred to reassess its validity at a later time.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>A total of 263,527 health problems, representing 891 unique problems, were identified for the group of 22,248 patients. Medical services claims contributed to the majority of problems identified (77%), followed by therapeutic indications from electronic prescriptions (14%), and single-indication drugs (9%). Physicians actively chose to assess 41.7% (n = 106,950) of health problems. Overall, 73% of the problems assessed were considered valid; 42% originated from medical service diagnostic codes, 11% from single indication drugs, and 47% from prescription indications. Twelve percent of problems identified through other treating physicians were considered valid compared to 28% identified through study physician claims.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Automation of an inter-institutional problem list added over half of all validated problems to the health problem list of which 12% were generated by conditions treated by other physicians. Automating the integration of existing information sources provides timely access to accurate and relevant health problem information. It may also accelerate the uptake and use of electronic medical record systems.</p

An automated technique for identifying associations between medications, laboratory results and problems

AbstractBackgroundThe patient problem list is an important component of clinical medicine. The problem list enables decision support and quality measurement, and evidence suggests that patients with accurate and complete problem lists may have better outcomes. However, the problem list is often incomplete.ObjectiveTo determine whether association rule mining, a data mining technique, has utility for identifying associations between medications, laboratory results and problems. Such associations may be useful for identifying probable gaps in the problem list.DesignAssociation rule mining was performed on structured electronic health record data for a sample of 100,000 patients receiving care at the Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Boston, MA. The dataset included 272,749 coded problems, 442,658 medications and 11,801,068 laboratory results.MeasurementsCandidate medication-problem and laboratory-problem associations were generated using support, confidence, chi square, interest, and conviction statistics. High-scoring candidate pairs were compared to a gold standard: the Lexi-Comp drug reference database for medications and Mosby’s Diagnostic and Laboratory Test Reference for laboratory results.ResultsWe were able to successfully identify a large number of clinically accurate associations. A high proportion of high-scoring associations were adjudged clinically accurate when evaluated against the gold standard (89.2% for medications with the best-performing statistic, chi square, and 55.6% for laboratory results using interest).ConclusionAssociation rule mining appears to be a useful tool for identifying clinically accurate associations between medications, laboratory results and problems and has several important advantages over alternative knowledge-based approaches

Doctor of Philosophy

dissertationWith the growing national dissemination of the electronic health record (EHR), there are expectations that the public will benefit from biomedical research and discovery enabled by electronic health data. Clinical data are needed for many diseases and conditions to meet the demands of rapidly advancing genomic and proteomic research. Many biomedical research advancements require rapid access to clinical data as well as broad population coverage. A fundamental issue in the secondary use of clinical data for scientific research is the identification of study cohorts of individuals with a disease or medical condition of interest. The problem addressed in this work is the need for generalized, efficient methods to identify cohorts in the EHR for use in biomedical research. To approach this problem, an associative classification framework was designed with the goal of accurate and rapid identification of cases for biomedical research: (1) a set of exemplars for a given medical condition are presented to the framework, (2) a predictive rule set comprised of EHR attributes is generated by the framework, and (3) the rule set is applied to the EHR to identify additional patients that may have the specified condition. iv Based on this functionality, the approach was termed the ‘cohort amplification' framework. The development and evaluation of the cohort amplification framework are the subject of this dissertation. An overview of the framework design is presented. Improvements to some standard associative classification methods are described and validated. A qualitative evaluation of predictive rules to identify diabetes cases and a study of the accuracy of identification of asthma cases in the EHR using frameworkgenerated prediction rules are reported. The framework demonstrated accurate and reliable rules to identify diabetes and asthma cases in the EHR and contributed to methods for identification of biomedical research cohorts

The Use of Routinely Collected Data in Clinical Trial Research

RCTs are the gold standard for assessing the effects of medical interventions, but they also pose many challenges, including the often-high costs in conducting them and a potential lack of generalizability of their findings. The recent increase in the availability of so called routinely collected data (RCD) sources has led to great interest in their application to support RCTs in an effort to increase the efficiency of conducting clinical trials. We define all RCTs augmented by RCD in any form as RCD-RCTs. A major subset of RCD-RCTs are performed at the point of care using electronic health records (EHRs) and are referred to as point-of-care research (POC-R). RCD-RCTs offer several advantages over traditional trials regarding patient recruitment and data collection, and beyond. Using highly standardized EHR and registry data allows to assess patient characteristics for trial eligibility and to examine treatment effects through routinely collected endpoints or by linkage to other data sources like mortality registries. Thus, RCD can be used to augment traditional RCTs by providing a sampling framework for patient recruitment and by directly measuring patient relevant outcomes. The result of these efforts is the generation of real-world evidence (RWE). Nevertheless, the utilization of RCD in clinical research brings novel methodological challenges, and issues related to data quality are frequently discussed, which need to be considered for RCD-RCTs. Some of the limitations surrounding RCD use in RCTs relate to data quality, data availability, ethical and informed consent challenges, and lack of endpoint adjudication which may all lead to uncertainties in the validity of their results. The purpose of this thesis is to help fill the aforementioned research gaps in RCD-RCTs, encompassing tasks such as assessing their current application in clinical research and evaluating the methodological and technical challenges in performing them. Furthermore, it aims to assess the reporting quality of published reports on RCD-RCTs