Dataset Information

Implementing standardized provider documentation in a tertiary epilepsy clinic.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

To incorporate standardized documentation into an epilepsy clinic and to use these standardized data to compare patients' perception of epilepsy diagnosis to provider documentation.

Methods

Using quality improvement methodology, we implemented interventions to increase documentation of epilepsy diagnosis, seizure frequency, and type from 49.8% to 70% of adult nonemployee patients seen by 6 providers over 5 months of routine clinical care. The main intervention consisted of an interactive SmartPhrase that mirrored a documentation template developed by the Epilepsy Learning Healthcare System. We assessed the weekly proportion of complete SmartPhrases among eligible patient encounters with a statistical process control chart. We used a subset of patients with established epilepsy care linked to existing patient-reported survey data to examine the proportion of patient-to-provider agreement on epilepsy diagnosis (yes vs no/unsure). We also examined sociodemographic and clinical characteristics of patients who disagreed vs agreed with provider's documentation of epilepsy diagnosis.

Results

The median SmartPhrase weekly completion rate was 78%. Established patients disagreed with providers with respect to epilepsy diagnosis in 18.5% of encounters (κ = 0.13), indicating that they did not have or were unsure if they had epilepsy despite having a provider-documented epilepsy diagnosis. Patients who disagreed with providers were similar to those who agreed with respect to age, sex, ethnicity, marital status, seizure frequency, type, and other quality-of-life measures.

Conclusion

This project supports the feasibility of implementing standardized documentation of data relevant to epilepsy care in a tertiary epilepsy clinic and highlights an opportunity for improvement in patient-provider communication.

SUBMITTER: Jones FJS

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7455323 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Evidence suggests that copy-pasted components of electronic notes may not reliably reflect the care delivered. Federal agencies have raised concerns that such components may be used to justify inappropriately inflated claims for reimbursement. It is not known whether copied information is used to justify higher evaluation and management (E&M) charges.This retrospective cohort study aimed to assess the relationship between the level of evaluation and management (E&M) charges and the method of documentation (none, distinct or copied) of lifestyle counseling (diet, exercise and weight loss) for patients with diabetes mellitus. To determine the association, an ordered multinomial logistic regression model that corrected for clustering within individual providers and patients and adjusted for patient and encounter characteristics was utilized. E&M charge level served as the primary outcome variable. Patients were included if they were followed by primary care physicians affiliated with two academic hospitals for a minimum of two years between 01/01/2000 and 12/13/2009.Lifestyle counseling was documented in 65.4% of 155,168 primary care encounters of 16,164 patients. Copied counseling was identified in 12,527 encounters. In multivariable analysis higher E&M charges were associated with older patient age, longer notes, treatment with insulin, medication changes and acute complaints. However, copied lifestyle counseling was associated with a decrease of 70.5% in the odds of higher E&M charge levels when time spent on counseling (required to justify higher charges based on counseling) was recorded (p<0.0001). This finding is opposite to what would have been expected if the impetus for copied documentation of lifestyle counseling was an increase in submitted E&M charges.There is no evidence that copied documentation of lifestyle counseling is used to justify higher evaluation and management charges. Higher charges were generally associated with indicators of complexity of care.

Project description:BackgroundUrine drug testing (UDT) is an essential tool to monitor opioid misuse among patients on chronic opioid therapy. Inaccurate interpretation of UDT can have deleterious consequences. Providers' ability to accurately interpret and document UDT, particularly definitive liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS) results, has not been widely studied.ObjectiveTo examine whether providers correctly interpret, document, and communicate LC-MS/MS UDT results.DesignThis is a retrospective chart review of 160 UDT results (80 aberrant; 80 non-aberrant) between August 2017 and February 2018 from 5 ambulatory clinics (3 primary care, 1 oncology, 1 pain management). Aberrant results were classified into one or more of the following categories: illicit drug use, simulated compliance, not taking prescribed medication, and taking a medication not prescribed. Accurate result interpretation was defined as concordance between the provider's documented interpretation and an expert laboratory toxicologist's interpretation. Outcome measures were concordance between provider and laboratory interpretation of UDT results, documentation of UDT results, results acknowledgement in the electronic health record, communication of results to the patient, and rate of prescription refills.Key resultsAberrant results were most frequently due to illicit drug use. Overall, only 88 of the 160 (55%) had any documented provider interpretations of which 25/88 (28%) were discordant with the laboratory toxicologist's interpretation. Thirty-six of the 160 (23%) documented communication of the results to the patient. Communicating results was more likely to be documented if the results were aberrant compared with non-aberrant (33/80 [41%] vs. 3/80 [4%], p?<?0.001). In all cases where provider interpretations were discordant with the laboratory interpretation, prescriptions were refilled.ConclusionsErroneous provider interpretation of UDT results, infrequent documentation of interpretation, lack of communication of results to patients, and prescription refills despite inaccurate interpretations are common. Expert assistance with urine toxicology interpretations may be needed to improve provider accuracy when interpreting toxicology results.

Project description:Study objectiveElectronic health record implementation can improve care, but may also adversely affect emergency department (ED) efficiency. We examine how a custom, ED provider, electronic documentation system (eDoc), which replaced paper documentation, affects operational performance.MethodsWe analyzed retrospective operational data for 1-year periods before and after eDoc implementation in a single ED. We computed daily operational statistics, reflecting 60,870 pre- and 59,337 postimplementation patient encounters. The prespecified primary outcome was daily mean length of stay; secondary outcomes were daily mean length of stay for admitted and discharged patients and daily mean arrival time to disposition for admitted patients. We used a prespecified multiple regression model to identify differences in outcomes while controlling for prespecified confounding variables.ResultsThe unadjusted change in length of stay was 8.4 minutes; unadjusted changes in secondary outcomes were length of stay for admitted patients 11.4 minutes, length of stay for discharged patients 1.8 minutes, and time to disposition 1.8 minutes. With a prespecified regression analysis to control for variations in operational characteristics, there were significant increases in length of stay (6.3 minutes [95% confidence interval 3.5 to 9.1 minutes]) and length of stay for discharged patients (5.1 minutes [95% confidence interval 1.9 to 8.3 minutes]). There was no statistically significant change in length of stay for admitted patients or time to disposition.ConclusionIn our single-center study, the isolated implementation of eDoc was associated with increases in overall and discharge length of stay. Our findings suggest that a custom-designed electronic provider documentation may negatively affect ED throughput. Strategies to mitigate these effects, such as reducing documentation requirements or adding clinical staff, scribes, or voice recognition, would be a valuable area of future research.