CORE
🇺🇦
make metadata, not war
Services
Services overview
Explore all CORE services
Access to raw data
API
Dataset
FastSync
Content discovery
Recommender
Discovery
OAI identifiers
OAI Resolver
Managing content
Dashboard
Bespoke contracts
Consultancy services
Support us
Support us
Membership
Sponsorship
Community governance
Advisory Board
Board of supporters
Research network
About
About us
Our mission
Team
Blog
FAQs
Contact us
Can the appropriateness of eye care be measured through cross-sectional retrospective patient record review in eye care practices in Australia? the icaretrack feasibility study
Authors
A Hayen
PD Hibbert
+6 more
KC Ho
I Jalbert
D Rahardjo
F Stapleton
AJR White
L Wiles
Publication date
1 March 2019
Publisher
'BMJ'
Doi
Cite
Abstract
© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2018. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ. Objectives The CareTrack study found that a wide range of appropriateness of care (ie, care in line with evidence-based or consensus-based guidelines) was delivered across many health conditions in Australia. This study therefore aimed to demonstrate the feasibility of using the CareTrack method (a retrospective onsite record review) to measure the appropriateness of eye care delivery. Design Cross-sectional feasibility study. Setting and participants Two hundred and thirteen patient records randomly selected from eight optometry and ophthalmology practices in Australia, selected through a combination of convenience and maximum variation sampling. Methods Retrospective record review designed to assess the alignment between eye care delivered and 93 clinical indicators (Delphi method involving 11 experts) extracted from evidence-based clinical practice guidelines. Primary outcome measure Number of eligible patient records, sampling rates and data collection time. This feasibility study also tested the ability of 93 clinical indicators to measure percentage appropriate eye care for preventative, glaucoma and diabetic eye care. A secondary outcome was the percentage of practitioner-patient encounters at which appropriate eye care was received. Results A median of 20 records (range 9 to 63) per practice were reviewed. Data collection time ranged from 3 to 5.5 hours (median 3.5). The most effective sampling strategy involved random letter generation followed by sequential sampling. The appropriateness of care was 69% (95% CI 67% to 70%) for preventative eye care, 60% (95% CI 56% to 58%) for glaucoma and 63% (95% CI 57% to 69%) for diabetic eye care. Conclusions Appropriateness of eye care can be measured effectively using retrospective record review of eye care practices and consensus-based care indicators
Similar works
Full text
Available Versions
University of Canberra Research Repository
See this paper in CORE
Go to the repository landing page
Download from data provider
oai:pure.atira.dk:publications...
Last time updated on 27/09/2023
UNSWorks
See this paper in CORE
Go to the repository landing page
Download from data provider
oai:unsworks.library.unsw.edu....
Last time updated on 02/09/2020
OPUS - University of Technology Sydney
See this paper in CORE
Go to the repository landing page
Download from data provider
oai:opus.lib.uts.edu.au:10453/...
Last time updated on 18/10/2019