How well does chart abstraction measure quality? A prospective comparison of standardized patients with the medical record

被引:239
作者
Luck, J
Peabody, JW
Dresselhaus, TR
Lee, M
Glassman, P
机构
[1] Inst Global Hlth, San Francisco Vet Affairs Med Ctr, San Francisco, CA 94105 USA
[2] Vet Affairs Greater Los Angeles Healthcare Syst, Los Angeles, CA USA
[3] Vet Affairs Ctr Study Hlth Care Provider Behav, Sepulveda, CA USA
[4] Univ Calif San Diego, Sch Med, San Diego, CA 92103 USA
[5] San Diego Vet Affairs Med Ctr, San Diego, CA USA
[6] Univ Calif San Francisco, San Francisco, CA 94143 USA
[7] Univ Calif Los Angeles, Sch Med, Los Angeles, CA USA
[8] Univ Calif Los Angeles, Sch Publ Hlth, Los Angeles, CA 90024 USA
[9] RAND, Santa Monica, CA USA
[10] Inst Global Hlth, San Francisco, CA USA
关键词
D O I
10.1016/S0002-9343(00)00363-6
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
PURPOSE: Despite widespread reliance on chart abstraction for quality measurement, concerns persist about its reliability and validity. We prospectively evaluated the validity of chart abstraction by directly comparing it with the gold standard of reports by standardized patients. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: Twenty randomly selected general internal medicine residents and attending faculty physicians at the primary care clinics of two Veterans Affairs Medical Centers blindly evaluated and treated actor-patients (standardized patients) who had one of four common diseases: diabetes, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, coronary artery disease, or low back pain. Charts from the visits were abstracted using explicit quality criteria; standardized patients completed a checklist containing the same criteria. For each physician, quality was measured for two different cases of the four conditions (a total of 160 physician-patient encounters). We compared chart abstraction with standardized;patient reports for four aspects of the encounter: taking the history, examining the patient, making the diagnosis, and prescribing appropriate treat-ment. The sensitivity and specificity of chart abstraction were calculated. RESULTS: The mean (+/- SD) chart abstraction score was 54% +/- 9%, substantially less than the mean score on the standardized-patient checklist of 68% +/- 9% (P <0.001). This finding was similar for all four conditions and at both sites. "False positives"- chart-recorded necessary care actions not reported by the standardized patients-resulted in a specificity of only 81%. The overall sensitivity of chart abstraction for necessary care was only 70%. CONCLUSIONS: Chart abstraction underestimates the quality of care for common outpatient general medical conditions when compared with standardized-patient reports. The medical record is neither sensitive nor specific. Quality measurements derived from chart abstraction may have important shortcomings, particularly as the basis for drawing policy conclusions or making management decisions. (C) 2000 by Excerpta Medica, Inc.
引用
收藏
页码:642 / 649
页数:8
相关论文
共 52 条
[1]  
BEARD CM, 1992, J CLIN EPIDEMIOL, V45, P1013
[2]   The use of standardized patients in research in general practice [J].
Beullens, J ;
Rethans, JJ ;
Goedhuys, J ;
Buntinx, F .
FAMILY PRACTICE, 1997, 14 (01) :58-62
[3]   HOSPITAL CHARACTERISTICS ASSOCIATED WITH ADVERSE EVENTS AND SUBSTANDARD CARE [J].
BRENNAN, TA ;
HEBERT, LE ;
LAIRD, NM ;
LAWTHERS, A ;
THORPE, KE ;
LEAPE, LL ;
LOCALIO, AR ;
LIPSITZ, SR ;
NEWHOUSE, JP ;
WEILER, PC ;
HIATT, HH .
JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 1991, 265 (24) :3265-3269
[4]   SELF-REPORT VERSUS MEDICAL RECORD FUNCTIONAL STATUS [J].
BURNS, RB ;
MOSKOWITZ, MA ;
ASH, A ;
KANE, RL ;
FINCH, MD ;
BAK, SM .
MEDICAL CARE, 1992, 30 (05) :MS85-MS95
[5]   THE MISINFORMATION ERA - THE FALL OF THE MEDICAL RECORD [J].
BURNUM, JF .
ANNALS OF INTERNAL MEDICINE, 1989, 110 (06) :482-484
[6]  
Carey T S, 1991, QRB Qual Rev Bull, V17, P54
[7]   THE PERIODIC HEALTH EXAMINATION PROVIDED TO ASYMPTOMATIC OLDER WOMEN - AN ASSESSMENT USING STANDARDIZED PATIENTS [J].
CARNEY, PA ;
DIETRICH, AJ ;
FREEMAN, DH ;
MOTT, LA .
ANNALS OF INTERNAL MEDICINE, 1993, 119 (02) :129-135
[8]  
Carter G M, 1992, Health Care Financ Rev, V14, P83
[9]  
COHEN R, 1990, DIABETES METAB, V16, P59
[10]  
DAVIS DA, 1995, JAMA-J AM MED ASSOC, V274, P700