Suscribirse

How well does chart abstraction measure quality? A prospective comparison of standardized patients with the medical record - 05/09/11

Doi : 10.1016/S0002-9343(00)00363-6 
Jeff Luck, MBA, PhD a, b, c, d, John W Peabody, MD, PhD a, c, e, f, h, , Timothy R Dresselhaus, MD, MPH g, Martin Lee, PhD b, c, Peter Glassman, MBBS, MSc c, d
a RAND (JL, JWP), Santa Monica, California, USA 
b UCLA Schools of Medicine and Public Health (JL, ML), Los Angeles, California, USA 
c Veterans Affairs Center for the Study of Health Care Provider Behavior (JL, JWP, ML, PG), Sepulveda, California, USA 
d Veterans Affairs Greater Los Angeles Healthcare System (JL, PG), Los Angeles, California, USA 
e San Francisco Veterans Affairs Medical Center (JWP), San Francisco, California, USA 
f Institute for Global Health (JWP), San Francisco, California, USA 
g San Diego Veterans Affairs Medical Center (TRD) and the University of California, San Diego, School of Medicine (TRD), San Diego, California, USA 
h University of California (JWP), San Francisco, California, USA 

*Requests for reprints should be addressed to John W. Peabody, MD, PhD, San Francisco Veterans Affairs Medical Center, c/o Institute for Global Health, 74 New Montgomery Street, Suite 508, San Francisco, California 94105

Abstract

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 treatment. 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.

El texto completo de este artículo está disponible en PDF.

Esquema


 Supported by Grant IIR 95–014B from Veterans Affairs Health Service Research and Development Service. Dr. Peabody is the recipient of a Senior Research Associate Career Development Award from the Department of Veterans Affairs.


© 2000  Excerpta Medica Inc. Reservados todos los derechos.
Añadir a mi biblioteca Eliminar de mi biblioteca Imprimir
Exportación

    Exportación citas

  • Fichero

  • Contenido

Vol 108 - N° 8

P. 642-649 - juin 2000 Regresar al número
Artículo precedente Artículo precedente
  • Cost-effectiveness of screening for anal squamous intraepithelial lesions and anal cancer in human immunodeficiency virus–negative homosexual and bisexual men
  • Sue J Goldie, Karen M Kuntz, Milton C Weinstein, Kenneth A Freedberg, Joel M Palefsky
| Artículo siguiente Artículo siguiente
  • Free radicals and oxidative stress
  • Thomas E. Andreoli

Bienvenido a EM-consulte, la referencia de los profesionales de la salud.
El acceso al texto completo de este artículo requiere una suscripción.

¿Ya suscrito a @@106933@@ revista ?

@@150455@@ Voir plus

Mi cuenta


Declaración CNIL

EM-CONSULTE.COM se declara a la CNIL, la declaración N º 1286925.

En virtud de la Ley N º 78-17 del 6 de enero de 1978, relativa a las computadoras, archivos y libertades, usted tiene el derecho de oposición (art.26 de la ley), el acceso (art.34 a 38 Ley), y correcta (artículo 36 de la ley) los datos que le conciernen. Por lo tanto, usted puede pedir que se corrija, complementado, clarificado, actualizado o suprimido información sobre usted que son inexactos, incompletos, engañosos, obsoletos o cuya recogida o de conservación o uso está prohibido.
La información personal sobre los visitantes de nuestro sitio, incluyendo su identidad, son confidenciales.
El jefe del sitio en el honor se compromete a respetar la confidencialidad de los requisitos legales aplicables en Francia y no de revelar dicha información a terceros.


Todo el contenido en este sitio: Copyright © 2025 Elsevier, sus licenciantes y colaboradores. Se reservan todos los derechos, incluidos los de minería de texto y datos, entrenamiento de IA y tecnologías similares. Para todo el contenido de acceso abierto, se aplican los términos de licencia de Creative Commons.