Dataset Information

Wait times to rheumatology care for patients with rheumatic diseases: a data linkage study of primary care electronic medical records and administrative data.

ABSTRACT:

Background

The Wait Time Alliance recently established wait time benchmarks for rheumatology consultations in Canada. Our aim was to quantify wait times to primary and rheumatology care for patients with rheumatic diseases.

Methods

We identified patients from primary care practices in the Electronic Medical Record Administrative data Linked Database who had referrals to Ontario rheumatologists over the period 2000-2013. To assess the full care pathway, we identified dates of symptom onset, presentation in primary care and referral from electronic medical records. Dates of rheumatologist consultations were obtained by linking with physician service claims. We determined the duration of each phase of the care pathway (symptom onset to primary care encounter, primary care encounter to referral, and referral to rheumatologist consultation) and compared them with established benchmarks.

Results

Among 2430 referrals from 168 family physicians, 2015 patients (82.9%) were seen by 146 rheumatologists within 1 year of referral. Of the 2430 referrals, 2417 (99.5%) occurred between 2005 and 2013. The main reasons for referral were osteoarthritis (32.4%) and systemic inflammatory rheumatic diseases (30.6%). Wait times varied by diagnosis and geographic region. Overall, the median wait time from referral to rheumatologist consultation was 74 (interquartile range 27-101) days; it was 66 (interquartile range 18-84) days for systemic inflammatory rheumatic diseases. Wait time benchmarks were not achieved, even for the most urgent types of referral. For systemic inflammatory rheumatic diseases, most of the delays occurred before referral.

Interpretation

Rheumatology wait times exceeded established benchmarks. Targeted efforts are needed to promote more timely access to both primary and rheumatology care. Routine linkage of electronic medical records with administrative data may help fill important gaps in knowledge about waits to primary and specialty care.

SUBMITTER: Widdifield J

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4933643 | biostudies-literature | 2016 Apr-Jun

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Wait times to rheumatology care for patients with rheumatic diseases: a data linkage study of primary care electronic medical records and administrative data.

Widdifield Jessica J Bernatsky Sasha S Thorne J Carter JC Bombardier Claire C Jaakkimainen R Liisa RL Wing Laura L Paterson J Michael JM Ivers Noah N Butt Debra D Lyddiatt Anne A Hofstetter Catherine C Ahluwalia Vandana V Tu Karen K

CMAJ open 20160401 2

<h4>Background</h4>The Wait Time Alliance recently established wait time benchmarks for rheumatology consultations in Canada. Our aim was to quantify wait times to primary and rheumatology care for patients with rheumatic diseases.<h4>Methods</h4>We identified patients from primary care practices in the Electronic Medical Record Administrative data Linked Database who had referrals to Ontario rheumatologists over the period 2000-2013. To assess the full care pathway, we identified dates of sympt ...[more]

PMID: 27398365

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundLinkage of electronic healthcare records is becoming increasingly important for research purposes. However, linkage error due to mis-recorded or missing identifiers can lead to biased results. We evaluated the impact of linkage error on estimated infection rates using two different methods for classifying links: highest-weight (HW) classification using probabilistic match weights and prior-informed imputation (PII) using match probabilities.MethodsA gold-standard dataset was created through deterministic linkage of unique identifiers in admission data from two hospitals and infection data recorded at the hospital laboratories (original data). Unique identifiers were then removed and data were re-linked by date of birth, sex and Soundex using two classification methods: i) HW classification - accepting the candidate record with the highest weight exceeding a threshold and ii) PII-imputing values from a match probability distribution. To evaluate methods for linking data with different error rates, non-random error and different match rates, we generated simulation data. Each set of simulated files was linked using both classification methods. Infection rates in the linked data were compared with those in the gold-standard data.ResultsIn the original gold-standard data, 1496/20924 admissions linked to an infection. In the linked original data, PII provided least biased results: 1481 and 1457 infections (upper/lower thresholds) compared with 1316 and 1287 (HW upper/lower thresholds). In the simulated data, substantial bias (up to 112%) was introduced when linkage error varied by hospital. Bias was also greater when the match rate was low or the identifier error rate was high and in these cases, PII performed better than HW classification at reducing bias due to false-matches.ConclusionsThis study highlights the importance of evaluating the potential impact of linkage error on results. PII can help incorporate linkage uncertainty into analysis and reduce bias due to linkage error, without requiring identifiers.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Administrative health records (AHRs) and electronic medical records (EMRs) are two key sources of population-based data for disease surveillance, but misclassification errors in the data can bias disease estimates. Methods that combine information from error-prone data sources can build on the strengths of AHRs and EMRs. We compared bias and error for four data-combining methods and applied them to estimate hypertension prevalence. METHODS:Our study included rule-based OR and AND methods that identify disease cases from either or both data sources, respectively, rule-based sensitivity-specificity adjusted (RSSA) method that corrects for inaccuracies using a deterministic rule, and probabilistic-based sensitivity-specificity adjusted (PSSA) method that corrects for error using a statistical model. Computer simulation was used to estimate relative bias (RB) and mean square error (MSE) under varying conditions of population disease prevalence, correlation amongst data sources, and amount of misclassification error. AHRs and EMRs for Manitoba, Canada were used to estimate hypertension prevalence using validated case definitions and multiple disease markers. RESULTS:The OR method had the lowest RB and MSE when population disease prevalence was 10%, and the RSSA method had the lowest RB and MSE when population prevalence increased to 20%. As the correlation between data sources increased, the OR method resulted in the lowest RB and MSE. Estimates of hypertension prevalence for AHRs and EMRs alone were 30.9% (95% CI: 30.6-31.2) and 24.9% (95% CI: 24.6-25.2), respectively. The estimates were 21.4% (95% CI: 21.1-21.7), for the AND method, 34.4% (95% CI: 34.1-34.8) for the OR method, 32.2% (95% CI: 31.8-32.6) for the RSSA method, and ranged from 34.3% (95% CI: 34.1-34.5) to 35.9% (95% CI, 35.7-36.1) for the PSSA method, depending on the statistical model. CONCLUSIONS:The OR and AND methods are influenced by correlation amongst the data sources, while the RSSA method is dependent on the accuracy of prior sensitivity and specificity estimates. The PSSA method performed well when population prevalence was high and average correlations amongst disease markers was low. This study will guide researchers to select a data-combining method that best suits their data characteristics.

Project description:Rational & objectiveElectronic health records can be leveraged to assess quality-of-care measures in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD). Neighborhood socioeconomic status could be a potential barrier to receiving appropriate evidence-based therapy and follow-up. We examined whether neighborhood socioeconomic status is independently associated with quality of care received by patients with CKD.Study designObservational study using electronic health record data.Setting & participantsRetrospective study of patients seen at a health care system in the 7-county Minneapolis/St Paul area.ExposuresCensus tract socioeconomic status measures (wealth, income, and education).OutcomesIndicators of CKD quality of care: (1) prescription for angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor/angiotensin receptor blocker in patients with stage ≥ 3 CKD or stage 1 or 2 CKD with urinary albumin-creatinine ratio (UACR) > 300 mg/d, (2) UACR measurement among patients with laboratory-based CKD (estimated glomerular filtration rate < 60 mL/min/1.72 m2), and (3) CKD identified on the problem list or coded for at an encounter among patients with laboratory-based CKD.Analytic approachMultilevel Poisson regression with robust error variance with a random intercept at the census tract level.ResultsOf the 16,776 patients who should be receiving an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor/angiotensin receptor blocker, 65% were prescribed these medications. Among patients with laboratory-based CKD (n = 25,097), UACR was measured in 27% and CKD was identified in the electronic health record in 55%. We found no independent association between any neighborhood socioeconomic status measures and CKD quality-of-care indicators.Limitations1 health care system and selection bias.ConclusionsWe found no association of neighborhood socioeconomic status with quality of CKD care in our cohort. However, adherence to CKD guidelines is low, indicating an opportunity to improve care for all patients regardless of neighborhood socioeconomic status.

Dataset Information

Wait times to rheumatology care for patients with rheumatic diseases: a data linkage study of primary care electronic medical records and administrative data.

Background

Methods

Results

Interpretation

Publications

Wait times to rheumatology care for patients with rheumatic diseases: a data linkage study of primary care electronic medical records and administrative data.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets