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
. 2020 Jun 22;20(1):116.
doi: 10.1186/s12911-020-01147-5.

Privacy-preserving architecture for providing feedback to clinicians on their clinical performance

Affiliations

Privacy-preserving architecture for providing feedback to clinicians on their clinical performance

Kassaye Yitbarek Yigzaw et al. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. .

Abstract

Background: Learning from routine healthcare data is important for the improvement of the quality of care. Providing feedback on clinicians' performance in comparison to their peers has been shown to be more efficient for quality improvements. However, the current methods for providing feedback do not fully address the privacy concerns of stakeholders.

Methods: The paper proposes a distributed architecture for providing feedback to clinicians on their clinical performances while protecting their privacy. The indicators for the clinical performance of a clinician are computed within a healthcare institution based on pseudonymized data extracted from the electronic health record (EHR) system. Group-level indicators of clinicians across healthcare institutions are computed using privacy-preserving distributed data-mining techniques. A clinician receives feedback reports that compare his or her personal indicators with the aggregated indicators of the individual's peers. Indicators aggregated across different geographical levels are the basis for monitoring changes in the quality of care. The architecture feasibility was practically evaluated in three general practitioner (GP) offices in Norway that consist of about 20,245 patients. The architecture was applied for providing feedback reports to 21 GPs on their antibiotic prescriptions for selected respiratory tract infections (RTIs). Each GP received one feedback report that covered antibiotic prescriptions between 2015 and 2018, stratified yearly. We assessed the privacy protection and computation time of the architecture.

Results: Our evaluation indicates that the proposed architecture is feasible for practical use and protects the privacy of the patients, clinicians, and healthcare institutions. The architecture also maintains the physical access control of healthcare institutions over the patient data. We sent a single feedback report to each of the 21 GPs. A total of 14,396 cases were diagnosed with the selected RTIs during the study period across the institutions. Of these cases, 2924 (20.3%) were treated with antibiotics, where 40.8% (1194) of the antibiotic prescriptions were narrow-spectrum antibiotics.

Conclusions: It is feasible to provide feedback to clinicians on their clinical performance in comparison to peers across healthcare institutions while protecting privacy. The architecture also enables monitoring changes in the quality of care following interventions.

Keywords: Antibiotic prescriptions; Feedback; Learning healthcare system; Peer comparison, privacy; Quality improvement; Security.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Privacy-preserving architecture for providing feedback to clinicians. Arrows indicate directions of information flow
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Data flow diagram for generating feedback reports
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
Antibiotic prescriptions for respiratory tract infections by an anonymous general practitioner in comparison to peers
Fig. 4
Fig. 4
Antibiotic prescriptions for respiratory tract infections across three Norwegian general-practitioner offices

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Institute of Medicine (US) Roundtable on Evidence-Based Medicine. The Learning Healthcare System: Workshop Summary. Washington (DC): National Academies Press (US); 2007. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK53494/. Accessed 17 Nov 2015. - PubMed
    1. Institute of Medicine (US) and National Academy of Engineering (US) Roundtable on Value & Science-Driven Health Care. Engineering a Learning Healthcare System: A Look at the Future: Workshop Summary. Washington (DC): National Academies Press (US); 2011. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK61965/. Accessed 18 Nov 2015. - PubMed
    1. Friedman C, Rigby M. Conceptualising and creating a global learning health system. Int J Med Inf. 2013;82:e63–e71. doi: 10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2012.05.010. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Bradley E, Holmboe E, Mattera J, Roumanis S, Radford M, Krumholz H. Data feedback efforts in quality improvement: lessons learned from US hospitals. Qual Saf Health Care. 2004;13:26–31. doi: 10.1136/qhc.13.1.26. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Meeker D, Linder JA, Fox CR, Friedberg MW, Persell SD, Goldstein NJ, et al. Effect of behavioral interventions on inappropriate antibiotic prescribing among primary care practices: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA. 2016;315:562–570. doi: 10.1001/jama.2016.0275. - DOI - PMC - PubMed

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources