Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Observational Study
. 2014 Aug;49(4):1226-48.
doi: 10.1111/1475-6773.12159. Epub 2014 Jan 29.

Using computer-extracted data from electronic health records to measure the quality of adolescent well-care

William Gardner  1 , Suzanne Morton, Sepheen C Byron, Aldo Tinoco, Benjamin D Canan, Karen Leonhart, Vivian Kong, Sarah Hudson Scholle
Affiliations
Observational Study

Using computer-extracted data from electronic health records to measure the quality of adolescent well-care

William Gardner et al. Health Serv Res. 2014 Aug.

Abstract

Objective: To determine whether quality measures based on computer-extracted EHR data can reproduce findings based on data manually extracted by reviewers.

Data sources: We studied 12 measures of care indicated for adolescent well-care visits for 597 patients in three pediatric health systems.

Study design: Observational study.

Data collection/extraction methods: Manual reviewers collected quality data from the EHR. Site personnel programmed their EHR systems to extract the same data from structured fields in the EHR according to national health IT standards.

Principal findings: Overall performance measured via computer-extracted data was 21.9 percent, compared with 53.2 percent for manual data. Agreement measures were high for immunizations. Otherwise, agreement between computer extraction and manual review was modest (Kappa = 0.36) because computer-extracted data frequently missed care events (sensitivity = 39.5 percent). Measure validity varied by health care domain and setting. A limitation of our findings is that we studied only three domains and three sites.

Conclusions: The accuracy of computer-extracted EHR quality reporting depends on the use of structured data fields, with the highest agreement found for measures and in the setting that had the greatest concentration of structured fields. We need to improve documentation of care, data extraction, and adaptation of EHR systems to practice workflow.

Keywords: Quality measurement; electronic health records; pediatric well-care.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. Baker DW, Persell SD, Thompson JA, Soman NS, Burgner KM, Liss D. Kmetik KS. “Automated Review of Electronic Health Records to Assess Quality of Care for Outpatients with Heart Failure”. Annals of Internal Medicine. 2007;146(4):270–7. - PubMed
    1. Fuhlbrigge A, Carey VJ, Finkelstein JA, Lozano P, Inui TS. Weiss KB. “Are Performance Measures Based on Automated Medical Records Valid for Physician/Practice Profiling of Asthma Care?”. Medical Care. 2008;46(6):620–6. - PubMed
    1. Gold R, Angier H, Mangione-Smith R, Gallia C, McIntire PJ, Cowburn S, Tillotson C. DeVoe JE. “Feasibility of Evaluating the CHIPRA Care Quality Measures in Electronic Health Record Data”. Pediatrics. 2012;130(1):139–49. doi: 10.1542/peds.2011-3705. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Hazelhurst B, McBurnie MA, Mularski RA, Puro JE. Chauvie SL. “Automating Care Quality Measurement with Health Information Technology”. The American Journal of Managed Care. 2012;166(6):313–9. - PubMed
    1. Iezzoni LI. “Assessing Quality Using Administrative Data”. Annals of Internal Medicine. 1997;127(8 Pt 2):666–74. - PubMed

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources