Oncologists' Views Regarding the Role of Electronic Health Records in Care Coordination

Real world challenges in maintaining data integrity in electronic health records in a cancer program

Electronic Health Record (EHR) systems increase clerical workload, promote copy-paste and error propagation. Documentation error rate in cancer diagnosis and treatment was examined in 776 patient records. Fifteen percent of the charts contained an error. Modern EHR systems, patient portals and engagement tools may facilitate the maintenance of accurate information.

Myths and Presumptions About Cancer Survivorship

Identifying cancer survivorship myths and presumptions perpetuated in survivorship circles.

Experience of Health Care Professionals Using Digital Tools in the Hospital: Qualitative Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

The digitalization of health care has many potential benefits, but it may also negatively impact health care professionals' well-being. Burnout can, in part, result from inefficient work processes related to the suboptimal implementation and use of health information technologies. Although strategies to reduce stress and mitigate clinician burnout typically involve individual-based interventions, emerging evidence suggests that improving the experience of using health information technologies can have a notable impact.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this systematic review was to collect evidence of the benefits and challenges associated with the use of digital tools in hospital settings with a particular focus on the experiences of health care professionals using these tools.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic literature review following the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines to explore the experience of health care professionals with digital tools in hospital settings. Using a rigorous selection process to ensure the methodological quality and validity of the study results, we included qualitative studies with distinct data that described the experiences of physicians and nurses. A panel of 3 independent researchers performed iterative data analysis and identified thematic constructs.

RESULTS

Of the 1175 unique primary studies, we identified 17 (1.45%) publications that focused on health care professionals' experiences with various digital tools in their day-to-day practice. Of the 17 studies, 10 (59%) focused on clinical decision support tools, followed by 6 (35%) studies focusing on electronic health records and 1 (6%) on a remote patient-monitoring tool. We propose a theoretical framework for understanding the complex interplay between the use of digital tools, experience, and outcomes. We identified 6 constructs that encompass the positive and negative experiences of health care professionals when using digital tools, along with moderators and outcomes. Positive experiences included feeling confident, responsible, and satisfied, whereas negative experiences included frustration, feeling overwhelmed, and feeling frightened. Positive moderators that may reinforce the use of digital tools included sufficient training and adequate workflow integration, whereas negative moderators comprised unfavorable social structures and the lack of training. Positive outcomes included improved patient care and increased workflow efficiency, whereas negative outcomes included increased workload, increased safety risks, and issues with information quality.

CONCLUSIONS

Although positive and negative outcomes and moderators that may affect the use of digital tools were commonly reported, the experiences of health care professionals, such as their thoughts and emotions, were less frequently discussed. On the basis of this finding, this study highlights the need for further research specifically targeting experiences as an important mediator of clinician well-being. It also emphasizes the importance of considering differences in the nature of specific tools as well as the profession and role of individual users.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

PROSPERO CRD42023393883; https://tinyurl.com/2htpzzxj.

Perceived Patient Workload and Its Impact on Outcomes During New Cancer Patient Visits: Analysis of a Convenience Sample

BACKGROUND

Studies exploring the workload in health care focus on the doctors' perspectives. The ecology of the health care environment is critical and different for doctors and patients.

OBJECTIVE

In this study, we explore the patient workload among newly diagnosed patients with cancer during their first visit and its impact on the patient's perceptions of the quality of care (their trust in their doctors, their satisfaction with the care visits, their perception of technology use).

METHODS

We collected data from the Hackensack Meridian Health, John Theurer Cancer Center between February 2021 and May 2022. The technology use considered during the visit is related to doctors' use of electronic health records. A total of 135 participants were included in the study. Most participants were 50-64 years old (n=91, 67.41%). A majority (n=81, 60%) of them were White, and only (n=16, 11.85%) went to graduate schools.

RESULTS

The findings captured the significant effect of overall workload on trust in doctors and perception of health IT use within the visits. On the other hand, the overall workload did not impact patients' satisfaction during the visit. A total of 80% (n=108) of patients experienced an overall high level of workload. Despite almost 55% (n=75) of them experiencing a high mental load, 71.1% (n=96) reported low levels of effort, 89% (n=120) experienced low time pressure, 85.2% (n=115) experienced low frustration levels, and 69.6% (n=94) experienced low physical activity. The more overall workload patients felt, the less they trusted their doctors (odds ratio [OR] 0.059, 95% CI 0.001-2.34; P=.007). Low trust was also associated with the demanding mental tasks in the visits (OR 0.055, 95% CI 0.002-2.64; P<.001), the physical load (OR 0.194, 95% CI 0.004-4.23; P<.001), the time load (OR 0.183, 95% CI 0.02-2.35; P=.046) the effort needed to cope with the environment (OR 0.163, 95% CI 0.05-1.69; P<.001), and the frustration levels (OR 0.323, 95% CI 0.04-2.55; P=.03). The patients' perceptions of electronic health record use during the visit were negatively impacted by the overall workload experienced by the patients (OR 0.315, 95% CI 0.08-6.35; P=.01) and the high frustration level experienced (OR 0.111, 95% CI 0.015-3.75; P<.001).

CONCLUSIONS

The study's findings established pathways for future research and have implications for cancer patients' workload. Better technology design and use can minimize perceived workload, which might contribute to the trust relationship between doctors and patients in this critical environment. Future human factors work needs to explore the workload and driving factors in longitudinal studies and assess whether these workloads might contribute to unintended patient outcomes and medical errors.

Challenges in inpatient care coordinators’ clinical workflow and opportunities in designing a health IT solution: A mixed methods study

Introduction

Inpatient care coordinators (ICCs) in the United States play a critical role in case management and care transition. ICCs spend a large amount of time in chart review and documentation through electronic health record (EHR) systems. However, significant knowledge gaps exist regarding their workflow barriers and their use of health information technology (Health IT). Using only quantitative or quantitative methods does not provide a comprehensive picture about ICC’s workflow due to its complex and dynamic nature. This work aimed to address this gap by conducting a mixed-methods study to understand the workflow of ICCs and identifying challenges in care deliver and documentation activities.

Methods

The study adopted a concurrent triangulation design including qualitative interviews with 12 ICC staff members in the United States followed by extraction of their EHR event logs for one month. The qualitative interview data were analyzed thematically, and the log data were analyzed statistically. The results were triangulated and interpreted.

Results

Three major workflow barriers faced by ICCs were identified: long travel time, heavy documentation load, and suboptimal communication. The event logs provided empirical evidence to support the workflow barriers identified in the interviews, especially in travel time and documentation load.

Discussion

ICC workflow has several inefficiencies. The study generated four design considerations to develop a Health IT solution: Mobility, EHR integration, Team-based Communication, and User Adoption to improve workflow efficiency and care coordination. Using a mixed-methods approach is effective and efficient in collecting and analyzing clinical workflow.

Association of Physician Referrals with Timely Cancer Care Using Tumor Registry and Claims Data

More Americans are being screened for and more are surviving colorectal cancer due to advanced treatments and better quality of care; however, these benefits are not equitably distributed among diverse or older populations. Differential care delivery outcomes are driven by multiple factors, including access to timely treatment that comes from high-quality care coordination. Providers help ensure such coordinated care, which includes timely referrals to specialists. Variation in referrals between providers can also result in differences in treatment plans and outcomes. Patients who are more often referred between the same diagnosing and treating providers may benefit from more timely care compared to those who are not. Our objective is to examine patterns of referral, or patient-sharing networks (PSNs), and our outcome, treatment delay of 30-days (yes/no). We hypothesize that if a patient is in a PSN they will have lower odds of a 30-day treatment initiation delay. Our observational population-based analysis using the National Cancer Institute (NCI)-linked tumor registry and Medicare claims database includes records for 27,689 patients diagnosed with colorectal cancer from 2001 to 2013, and treated with either chemotherapy, radiotherapy, or surgery. We modeled the adjusted odds of a delay and found 17.04% of patients experienced a 30-day delay in initial treatment. Factors that increased odds of a delay were lack of membership in a PSN (adjusted odds ratio [AOR]: 2.20; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.71-2.84), racial/ethnic minority status, and having multiple comorbidities. Provider characteristics significantly associated with greater odds of a delay were if dyads were not in the same facility (AOR: 1.95; 95% CI: 1.81-2.10), if providers were different genders, most notably male (diagnosing) and female (treating) [AOR: 1.23; 95% CI: 1.08-1.40, p = 0.0015]. PSNs appear to be associated with reduced of a care delay. The associations observed in our study address the demand for developing multilevel interventions to improve the delivery and coordination of high-quality of care for older cancer patients.

The Role of Electronic Medical Records in Reducing Unwarranted Clinical Variation in Acute Health Care: Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

The use of electronic medical records (EMRs)/electronic health records (EHRs) provides potential to reduce unwarranted clinical variation and thereby improve patient health care outcomes. Minimization of unwarranted clinical variation may raise and refine the standard of patient care provided and satisfy the quadruple aim of health care.

OBJECTIVE

A systematic review of the impact of EMRs and specific subcomponents (PowerPlans/SmartSets) on variation in clinical care processes in hospital settings was undertaken to summarize the existing literature on the effects of EMRs on clinical variation and patient outcomes.

METHODS

Articles from January 2000 to November 2020 were identified through a comprehensive search that examined EMRs/EHRs and clinical variation or PowerPlans/SmartSets. Thirty-six articles met the inclusion criteria. Articles were examined for evidence for EMR-induced changes in variation and effects on health care outcomes and mapped to the quadruple aim of health care.

RESULTS

Most of the studies reported positive effects of EMR-related interventions (30/36, 83%). All of the 36 included studies discussed clinical variation, but only half measured it (18/36, 50%). Those studies that measured variation generally examined how changes to variation affected individual patient care (11/36, 31%) or costs (9/36, 25%), while other outcomes (population health and clinician experience) were seldom studied. High-quality study designs were rare.

CONCLUSIONS

The literature provides some evidence that EMRs can help reduce unwarranted clinical variation and thereby improve health care outcomes. However, the evidence is surprisingly thin because of insufficient attention to the measurement of clinical variation, and to the chain of evidence from EMRs to variation in clinical practices to health care outcomes.

Effect of Digital Care Platforms on Quality of Care for Oncological Patients and Barriers and Facilitators for Their Implementation: Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Oncological health care services are challenged by the increasing number of cancer survivors, long-term follow-up care, and fragmentation of care. Digital care platforms are potential tools to deliver affordable, patient-centered oncological care. Previous reviews evaluated only one feature of a digital care platform or did not evaluate the effect on enhancement of information, self-efficacy, continuity of care, or patient- and health care provider-reported experiences. Additionally, they have not focused on the barriers and facilitators for implementation of a digital care platform in oncological care.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this systematic review was to collect the best available evidence of the effect of a digital care platform on quality of care parameters such as enhancement of available information, self-efficacy, continuity of care, and patient- and health care provider-reported experiences. Additionally, barriers and facilitators for implementation of digital care platforms were analyzed.

METHODS

The PubMed (Medline), Embase, CINAHL, and Cochrane Library databases were searched for the period from January 2000 to May 2020 for studies assessing the effect of a digital care platform on the predefined outcome parameters in oncological patients and studies describing barriers and facilitators for implementation. Synthesis of the results was performed qualitatively. Barriers and facilitators were categorized according to the framework of Grol and Wensing. The Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool was used for critical appraisal of the studies.

RESULTS

Seventeen studies were included for final analysis, comprising 8 clinical studies on the effectiveness of the digital care platform and 13 studies describing barriers and facilitators. Usage of a digital care platform appeared to enhance the availability of information and self-efficacy. There were no data available on the effect of a digital care platform on the continuity of care. However, based on focus group interviews, digital care platforms could potentially improve continuity of care by optimizing the exchange of patient information across institutes. Patient-reported experiences such as satisfaction with the platform were considerably positive. Most barriers for implementation were identified at the professional level, such as the concern for increased workload and unattended release of medical information to patients. Most facilitators were found at the patient and innovation levels, such as improved patient-doctor communication and patient empowerment. There were few barriers and facilitators mentioned at the economic and political levels.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of digital care platforms is associated with better quality of care through enhancement of availability of information and increased self-efficacy for oncological patients. The numerous facilitators identified at the patient level illustrate that patients are positive toward a digital care platform. However, despite these favorable results, robust evidence concerning the effectiveness of digital care platforms, especially from high-quality studies, is still lacking. Future studies should therefore aim to further investigate the effectiveness of digital care platforms, and the barriers and facilitators to their implementation at the economic and political levels.

What Oncologists Want: Identifying Challenges and Preferences on Diagnosis Data Entry to Reduce EHR-Induced Burden and Improve Clinical Data Quality

PURPOSE

Accurate recording of diagnosis (DX) data in electronic health records (EHRs) is important for clinical practice and learning health care. Previous studies show statistically stable patterns of data entry in EHRs that contribute to inaccurate DX, likely because of a lack of data entry support. We conducted qualitative research to characterize the preferences of oncological care providers on cancer DX data entry in EHRs during clinical practice.

METHODS

We conducted semistructured interviews and focus groups to uncover common themes on DX data entry preferences and barriers to accurate DX recording. Then, we developed a survey questionnaire sent to a cohort of oncologists to verify the generalizability of our initial findings. We constrained our participants to a single specialty and institution to ensure similar clinical backgrounds and clinical experience with a single EHR system.

RESULTS

A total of 12 neuro-oncologists and thoracic oncologists were involved in the interviews and focus groups. The survey developed from these two initial thrusts was distributed to 19 participants yielding a 94.7% survey response rate. Clinicians reported similar user interface experiences, barriers, and dissatisfaction with current DX entry systems including repetitive entry operations, difficulty in finding specific DX options, time-consuming interactions, and the need for workarounds to maintain efficiency. The survey revealed inefficient DX search interfaces and challenging entry processes as core barriers.

CONCLUSION

Oncologists seem to be divided between specific DX data entry and time efficiency because of current interfaces and feel hindered by the burdensome and repetitive nature of EHR data entry. Oncologists' top concern for adopting data entry support interventions is ensuring that it provides significant time-saving benefits and increasing workflow efficiency. Future interventions should account for time efficiency, beyond ensuring data entry effectiveness.

Data Integration to Improve Real-world Health Outcomes Research for Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer in the United States: Descriptive and Qualitative Exploration

Background

The integration of data from disparate sources could help alleviate data insufficiency in real-world studies and compensate for the inadequacies of single data sources and short-duration, small sample size studies while improving the utility of data for research.

Objective

This study aims to describe and evaluate a process of integrating data from several complementary sources to conduct health outcomes research in patients with non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). The integrated data set is also used to describe patient demographics, clinical characteristics, treatment patterns, and mortality rates.

Methods

This retrospective cohort study integrated data from 4 sources: administrative claims from the HealthCore Integrated Research Database, clinical data from a Cancer Care Quality Program (CCQP), clinical data from abstracted medical records (MRs), and mortality data from the US Social Security Administration. Patients with lung cancer who initiated second-line (2L) therapy between November 01, 2015, and April 13, 2018, were identified in the claims and CCQP data. Eligible patients were 18 years or older and received atezolizumab, docetaxel, erlotinib, nivolumab, pembrolizumab, pemetrexed, or ramucirumab in the 2L setting. The main analysis cohort included patients with claims data and data from at least one additional data source (CCQP or MR). Patients without integrated data (claims only) were reported separately. Descriptive and univariate statistics were reported.

Results

Data integration resulted in a main analysis cohort of 2195 patients with NSCLC; 2106 patients had CCQP and 407 patients had MR data. The claims-only cohort included 931 eligible patients. For the main analysis cohort, the mean age was 62.1 (SD 9.27) years, 48.56% (1066/2195) were female, the median length of follow-up was 6.8 months, and for 37.77% (829/2195), death was observed. For the claims-only cohort, the mean age was 66.6 (SD 12.69) years, 52.1% (485/931) were female, the median length of follow-up was 8.6 months, and for 29.3% (273/931), death was observed. The most frequent 2L treatment was immunotherapy (1094/2195, 49.84%), followed by platinum-based regimens (472/2195, 21.50%) and single-agent chemotherapy (441/2195, 20.09%); mean duration of 2L therapy was 5.6 (SD 4.9, median 4) months. We describe challenges and learnings from the data integration process, and the benefits of the integrated data set, which includes a richer set of clinical and outcome data to supplement the utilization metrics available in administrative claims.

Conclusions

The management of patients with NSCLC requires care from a multidisciplinary team, leading to a lack of a single aggregated data source in real-world settings. The availability of integrated clinical data from MRs, health plan claims, and other sources of clinical care may improve the ability to assess emerging treatments.

How technology impacts communication between cancer patients and their health care providers: A systematic literature review

OBJECTIVE

To ensure the well-being of their patients, health care providers (HCPs) are putting more effort into the quality of the communication they provide in oncology clinics. With the emergence of Health Information Technology (HIT), the dynamics between doctors and patients in oncology settings have changed. The purpose of this literature review is to explore and demonstrate how various health information technologies impact doctor-patient communication in oncology settings.

METHOD

A systematic literature review was conducted in 4 databases (PubMed, Cochrane, Web of Science, IEEE Xplore) to select publications that are in English, published between January 2009 and September 2020. This review reports outcomes related to the impacts of using health information technologies on doctor-patient communication according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis Reviews and Meta-Analysis guidelines (PRISMA).

RESULTS

We identified 31 studies which satisfied the selection and eligibility criteria. The review revealed a diverse range of HIT used to support communication between cancer patients and their HCPs in oncology settings. Outcomes related to communication were examined to demonstrate how technology can improve access to care in clinical settings and online. When technology is used effectively to support patient knowledge and shared understanding, this increases the patient's satisfaction and ability to manage emotions, make decisions, and progress in their treatment, in addition to increasing social support and building a stronger therapeutic alliance based on shared knowledge and transparency between clinicians and patients.

CONCLUSION

Technology-based solutions can help strengthen the relationship and communication between patients and their doctors. They can empower the patient's well-being, help doctors make better decisions and enhance the therapeutic alliance between them. Thus, using technology to enhance communication in healthcare settings remains beneficial if its use is structured and target oriented. Future studies should focus on comparing in-depth the difference between outpatient and inpatient settings in terms of the efforts required and the extent of the impacts from both clinicians' and cancer patients' perspectives.

Effects of Electronic Health Record Implementation and Barriers to Adoption and Use: A Scoping Review and Qualitative Analysis of the Content

Despite the great advances in the field of electronic health records (EHRs) over the past 25 years, implementation and adoption challenges persist, and the benefits realized remain below expectations. This scoping review aimed to present current knowledge about the effects of EHR implementation and the barriers to EHR adoption and use. A literature search was conducted in PubMed, Web of Science, IEEE Xplore Digital Library and ACM Digital Library for studies published between January 2005 and May 2020. In total, 7641 studies were identified of which 142 met the criteria and attained the consensus of all researchers on inclusion. Most studies (n = 91) were published between 2017 and 2019 and 81 studies had the United States as the country of origin. Both positive and negative effects of EHR implementation were identified, relating to clinical work, data and information, patient care and economic impact. Resource constraints, poor/insufficient training and technical/educational support for users, as well as poor literacy and skills in technology were the identified barriers to adoption and use that occurred frequently. Although this review did not conduct a quality analysis of the included papers, the lack of uniformity in the use of EHR definitions and detailed contextual information concerning the study settings could be observed.

Clinical Decision Support and Implications for the Clinician Burnout Crisis

OBJECTIVES

This survey aimed to review aspects of clinical decision support (CDS) that contribute to burnout and identify key themes for improving the acceptability of CDS to clinicians, with the goal of decreasing said burnout.

METHODS

We performed a survey of relevant articles from 2018-2019 addressing CDS and aspects of clinician burnout from PubMed and Web of Science™. Themes were manually extracted from publications that met inclusion criteria.

RESULTS

Eighty-nine articles met inclusion criteria, including 12 review articles. Review articles were either prescriptive, describing how CDS should work, or analytic, describing how current CDS tools are deployed. The non-review articles largely demonstrated poor relevance and acceptability of current tools, and few studies showed benefits in terms of efficiency or patient outcomes from implemented CDS. Encouragingly, multiple studies highlighted steps that succeeded in improving both acceptability and relevance of CDS.

CONCLUSIONS

CDS can contribute to clinician frustration and burnout. Using the techniques of improving relevance, soliciting feedback, customization, measurement of outcomes and metrics, and iteration, the effects of CDS on burnout can be ameliorated.

Workflow Differences Affect Data Accuracy in Oncologic EHRs: A First Step Toward Detangling the Diagnosis Data Babel

PURPOSE

Diagnosis (DX) information is key to clinical data reuse, yet accessible structured DX data often lack accuracy. Previous research hints at workflow differences in cancer DX entry, but their link to clinical data quality is unclear. We hypothesized that there is a statistically significant relationship between workflow-describing variables and DX data quality.

METHODS

We extracted DX data from encounter and order tables within our electronic health records (EHRs) for a cohort of patients with confirmed brain neoplasms. We built and optimized logistic regressions to predict the odds of fully accurate (ie, correct neoplasm type and anatomic site), inaccurate, and suboptimal (ie, vague) DX entry across clinical workflows. We selected our variables based on correlation strength of each outcome variable.

RESULTS

Both workflow and personnel variables were predictive of DX data quality. For example, a DX entered in departments other than oncology had up to 2.89 times higher odds of being accurate (P < .0001) compared with an oncology department; an outpatient care location had up to 98% fewer odds of being inaccurate (P < .0001), but had 458 times higher odds of being suboptimal (P < .0001) compared with main campus, including the cancer center; and a DX recoded by a physician assistant had 85% fewer odds of being suboptimal (P = .005) compared with those entered by physicians.

CONCLUSION

These results suggest that differences across clinical workflows and the clinical personnel producing EHR data affect clinical data quality. They also suggest that the need for specific structured DX data recording varies across clinical workflows and may be dependent on clinical information needs. Clinicians and researchers reusing oncologic data should consider such heterogeneity when conducting secondary analyses of EHR data.

Importance of quality-of-life priorities and preferences surrounding treatment decision making in patients with cancer and oncology clinicians

BACKGROUND

Shared decision-making (SDM) occurs when a patient partners with their oncologist to integrate personal preferences and values into treatment decisions. A key component of SDM is the elicitation of patient preferences and values, yet little is known about how and when these are elicited, communicated, prioritized, and documented within clinical encounters.

METHODS

This cross-sectional study evaluated nationwide data collected by CancerCare to better understand current patterns of SDM between patients and their oncology clinicians. Patient surveys included questions about the importance of quality-of-life preferences and discussions regarding quality-of-life priorities with their clinicians. Clinician surveys included questions about the discussion of quality-of-life priorities and preferences with patients, the effect of quality-of-life priorities on treatment recommendations, and quality-of-life priority documentation in practice.

RESULTS

Patient survey completers (n = 320; 33% response rate) were predominantly women (95%), had a diagnosis of breast cancer (59%), or were receiving active cancer treatment (59%). Clinician survey completers (n = 112; 5% response rate) predominately identified as hematologists or oncologists (66%). Although 67% of clinicians reported knowing their patients' personal quality-of-life priorities and preferences before finalizing treatment plans, only 37% of patients reported that these discussions occurred before treatment initiation. Most patients (95%) considered out-of-pocket expenses important during treatment planning, yet only 59% reported discussing out-of-pocket expenses with their clinician before finalizing treatment plans. A majority of clinicians (52%) considered clinic questionnaires as feasible to document quality-of-life priorities and preferences.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients and clinicians reported that preferences related to quality-of-life should be considered in treatment decision making, yet barriers to SDM, preference elicitation, and documentation remain.

A tale of three subspecialties: Diagnosis recording patterns are internally consistent but Specialty-Dependent

BACKGROUND

Structured diagnosis (DX) are crucial for secondary use of electronic health record (EHR) data. However, they are often suboptimally recorded. Our previous work showed initial evidence of variable DX recording patterns in oncology charts even after biopsy records are available.

OBJECTIVE

We verified this finding's internal and external validity. We hypothesized that this recording pattern would be preserved in a larger cohort of patients for the same disease. We also hypothesized that this effect would vary across subspecialties.

METHODS

We extracted DX data from EHRs of patients treated for brain, lung, and pancreatic neoplasms, identified through clinician-led chart reviews. We used statistical methods (i.e., binomial and mixed model regressions) to test our hypotheses.

RESULTS

We found variable recording patterns in brain neoplasm DX (i.e., larger number of distinct DX-OR = 2.2, P < 0.0001, higher descriptive specificity scores-OR = 1.4, P < 0.0001-and much higher entropy after the BX-OR = 3.8 P = 0.004 and OR = 8.0, P < 0.0001), confirming our initial findings. We also found strikingly different patterns for lung and pancreas DX. Although both seemed to have much lower DX sequence entropy after the BX-OR = 0.198, P = 0.015 and OR = 0.099, P = 0.015, respectively compared to OR = 3.8 P = 0.004). We also found statistically significant differences between the brain dataset and both the lung (P < 0.0001) and pancreas (0.009

CONCLUSION

Our results suggest that disease-specific DX entry patterns exist and are established differently by clinical subspecialty. These differences should be accounted for during clinical data reuse and data quality assessments but also during EHR entry system design to maximize accurate, precise and consistent data entry likelihood.

Collapse

Key Words

• clinical data management
• data quality
• electronic health records
• learning healthcare system
• secondary use of clinical data

Collapse

MESH Headings Collapse

Grants

• K12 GM102773 NIGMS NIH HHS
• UL1 TR001420 NCATS NIH HHS

Collapse

Affiliation(s)

Jose-Franck Diaz-Garelli Wake Forest Baptist Medical Center, Winston Salem, North Carolina, USA
Roy Strowd Wake Forest Baptist Medical Center, Winston Salem, North Carolina, USA
Tamjeed Ahmed Wake Forest Baptist Medical Center, Winston Salem, North Carolina, USA
Brian J Wells Wake Forest Baptist Medical Center, Winston Salem, North Carolina, USA
Rebecca Merrill Wake Forest Baptist Medical Center, Winston Salem, North Carolina, USA
Javier Laurini Wake Forest Baptist Medical Center, Winston Salem, North Carolina, USA
Boris Pasche Wake Forest Baptist Medical Center, Winston Salem, North Carolina, USA
Umit Topaloglu Wake Forest Baptist Medical Center, Winston Salem, North Carolina, USA

Collapse

Lost in Translation: Diagnosis Records Show More Inaccuracies After Biopsy in Oncology Care EHRs

The use of diagnosis (DX) data is crucial to secondary use of electronic health record (EHR) data, yet accessible structured DX data often lack in accuracy. DX descriptions associated with structured DX codes vary even after recording biopsy results; this may indicate poor data quality. We hypothesized that biopsy reports in cancer care charts do not improve intrinsic DX data quality. We analyzed DX data for a manually well-annotated cohort of patients with brain neoplasms. We built statistical models to predict the number of fully-accurate (i.e., correct neoplasm type and anatomical location) and inaccurate DX (i.e. type or location contradicts cohort data) descriptions. We found some evidence of statistically larger numbers of fully-accurate (RR=3.07, p=0.030) but stronger evidence of much larger numbers of inaccurate DX (RR=12.3, p=0.001 and RR=19.6, p<0.0001) after biopsy result recording. Still, 65.9% of all DX records were neither fully-accurate nor fully-inaccurate. These results suggest EHRs must be modified to support more reliable DX data recording and secondary use of EHR data.