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
. 2023 Mar;14(2):326-336.
doi: 10.1055/s-0043-1767681. Epub 2023 May 3.

Using Existing Clinical Information Models for Dutch Quality Registries to Reuse Data and Follow COUMT Paradigm

Maike H J Schepens  1   2 , Annemarie C Trompert  3 , Miranda L van Hooff  4   5 , Erik van der Velde  6   7 , Marjon Kallewaard  6 , Iris J A M Verberk-Jonkers  6   8 , Huib A Cense  9   10 , Diederik M Somford  11 , Sjoerd Repping  12 , Selma C Tromp  6   13 , Michel W J M Wouters  2   13   14
Affiliations

Using Existing Clinical Information Models for Dutch Quality Registries to Reuse Data and Follow COUMT Paradigm

Maike H J Schepens et al. Appl Clin Inform. 2023 Mar.

Abstract

Background: Reuse of health care data for various purposes, such as the care process, for quality measurement, research, and finance, will become increasingly important in the future; therefore, "Collect Once Use Many Times" (COUMT). Clinical information models (CIMs) can be used for content standardization. Data collection for national quality registries (NQRs) often requires manual data entry or batch processing. Preferably, NQRs collect required data by extracting data recorded during the health care process and stored in the electronic health record.

Objectives: The first objective of this study was to analyze the level of coverage of data elements in NQRs with developed Dutch CIMs (DCIMs). The second objective was to analyze the most predominant DCIMs, both in terms of the coverage of data elements as well as in their prevalence across existing NQRs.

Methods: For the first objective, a mapping method was used which consisted of six steps, ranging from a description of the clinical pathway to a detailed mapping of data elements. For the second objective, the total number of data elements that matched with a specific DCIM was counted and divided by the total number of evaluated data elements.

Results: An average of 83.0% (standard deviation: 11.8%) of data elements in studied NQRs could be mapped to existing DCIMs . In total, 5 out of 100 DCIMs were needed to map 48.6% of the data elements.

Conclusion: This study substantiates the potential of using existing DCIMs for data collection in Dutch NQRs and gives direction to further implementation of DCIMs. The developed method is applicable to other domains. For NQRs, implementation should start with the five DCIMs that are most prevalently used in the NQRs. Furthermore, a national agreement on the leading principle of COUMT for the use and implementation for DCIMs and (inter)national code lists is needed.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

None declared.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Overall mapping method.
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
High-level clinical pathway prostate cancer.
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
Overview of the relative results of 31 national quality registries per mapping category.
Fig. 4
Fig. 4
Predominantly used Dutch Clinical Information Models (DCIMs) for mapping data elements from national quality registries (NQRs).
Fig. 5
Fig. 5
Prevalence of Dutch Clinical Information Models (DCIMs) in national quality registries (NQRs).
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Emilsson L, Lindahl B, Köster M, Lambe M, Ludvigsson J F. Review of 103 Swedish healthcare quality registries. J Intern Med. 2015;277(01):94–136. - PubMed
    1. Hoeijmakers F, Beck N, Wouters M WJM, Prins H A, Steup W H. National quality registries: how to improve the quality of data? J Thorac Dis. 2018;10 29:S3490–S3499. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Joukes E, Cornet R, de Keizer N, de Bruijne M. Collect once, use many times: end-users don't practice what they preach. Stud Health Technol Inform. 2016;228:252–256. - PubMed
    1. Goossen W TF. Detailed clinical models: representing knowledge, data and semantics in healthcare information technology. Healthc Inform Res. 2014;20(03):163–172. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Oniki T A, Coyle J F, Parker C G, Huff S M. Lessons learned in detailed clinical modeling at Intermountain Healthcare. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2014;21(06):1076–1081. - PMC - PubMed

Publication types