Dataset Information

Assessing effectiveness and patient perceptions of a novel electronic medical record for the management of inflammatory bowel disease.

ABSTRACT:

Background and aim

There is an increasing prevalence of chronic disease worldwide, resulting in multiple management challenges. Inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) is an exemplar chronic disease requiring coordinated longitudinal care. We propose that Crohn's Colitis Care (CCCare), a novel IBD-specific, structured electronic medical record is effective at improving data capture and is acceptable to patients.

Methods

A comparison was made between IBD-data completeness in usual records and CCCare. CCCare's acceptability to patients was assessed in two independent IBD patient cohorts and included:• Overall ratings of acceptability.• Factors associated with pre-exposure acceptability ratings.• Whether exposure and security concerns influenced acceptability ratings.• Direct patient feedback through CCCare's patient portal.

Results

In all cases reviewed, there was data gain using structured CCCare fields compared with IBD documentation in usual medical records. The overall acceptability in the combined cohort (n = 310) was very high. More than three-quarters of patients rated acceptability as >7 of 10. Self-reported information technology (IT) literacy positively associated with acceptability. Exposure had a small positive affect on acceptability, whereas security concerns had little impact on acceptability. Patient portal feedback revealed that most patients are very likely to recommend CCCare to others (8.56 ± 2.2 [out of 10]).

Conclusion

CCCare is effective in supporting more complete IBD-specific data capture compared with usual medical records. It is highly acceptable to patients, especially those with reasonable IT literacy. Patient concerns about privacy and security of electronic medical records (EMRs) did not significantly affect acceptability.

SUBMITTER: Kaazan P

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8454479 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundWhile concerns remain regarding Electronic Medical Records (EMR) use impeding doctor-patient communication, resident and faculty patient perspectives post-widespread EMR adoption remain largely unexplored.ObjectiveWe aimed to describe patient perspectives of outpatient resident and faculty EMR use and identify positive and negative EMR use examples to promote optimal utilization.DesignThis was a prospective mixed-methods study.ParticipantsInternal medicine faculty and resident patients at the University of Chicago's primary care clinic participated in the study.ApproachIn 2013, one year after EMR implementation, telephone interviews were conducted with patients using open-ended and Likert style questions to elicit positive and negative perceptions of EMR use by physicians. Interview transcripts were analyzed qualitatively to develop a coding classification. Satisfaction with physician EMR use was examined using bivariate statistics.ResultsIn total, 108 interviews were completed and analyzed. Two major themes were noted: (1) Clinical Functions of EMR and (2) Communication Functions of EMR; as well as six subthemes: (1a) Clinical Care (i.e., clinical efficiency), (1b) Documentation (i.e., proper record keeping and access), (1c) Information Access, (1d) Educational Resource, (2a) Patient Engagement and (2b) Physical Focus (i.e., body positioning). Overall, 85 % (979/1154) of patient perceptions of EMR use were positive, with the majority within the "Clinical Care" subtheme (n?=?218). Of negative perceptions, 66 % (115/175) related to the "Communication Functions" theme, and the majority of those related to the "Physical Focus" subtheme (n?=?71). The majority of patients (90 %, 95/106) were satisfied with physician EMR use: 59 % (63/107) reported the computer had a positive effect on their relationship and only 7 % (8/108) reported the EMR made it harder to talk with their doctors.ConclusionsDespite concerns regarding EMRs impeding doctor-patient communication, patients reported largely positive perceptions of the EMR with many patients reporting high levels of satisfaction. Future work should focus on improving doctors "physical focus" when using the EMR to redirect towards the patient.

Project description:BACKGROUND:The increased use of electronic medical records (EMRs) in Canadian primary health care practice has resulted in an expansion of the availability of EMR data. Potential users of these data need to understand their quality in relation to the uses to which they are applied. Herein, we propose a basic model for assessing primary health care EMR data quality, comprising a set of data quality measures within four domains. We describe the process of developing and testing this set of measures, share the results of applying these measures in three EMR-derived datasets, and discuss what this reveals about the measures and EMR data quality. The model is offered as a starting point from which data users can refine their own approach, based on their own needs. METHODS:Using an iterative process, measures of EMR data quality were created within four domains: comparability; completeness; correctness; and currency. We used a series of process steps to develop the measures. The measures were then operationalized, and tested within three datasets created from different EMR software products. RESULTS:A set of eleven final measures were created. We were not able to calculate results for several measures in one dataset because of the way the data were collected in that specific EMR. Overall, we found variability in the results of testing the measures (e.g. sensitivity values were highest for diabetes, and lowest for obesity), among datasets (e.g. recording of height), and by patient age and sex (e.g. recording of blood pressure, height and weight). CONCLUSIONS:This paper proposes a basic model for assessing primary health care EMR data quality. We developed and tested multiple measures of data quality, within four domains, in three different EMR-derived primary health care datasets. The results of testing these measures indicated that not all measures could be utilized in all datasets, and illustrated variability in data quality. This is one step forward in creating a standard set of measures of data quality. Nonetheless, each project has unique challenges, and therefore requires its own data quality assessment before proceeding.