Assessment of Automating Safety Surveillance From Electronic Health Records: Analysis for the Quality and Safety Review System
- PMID: 28671914
- DOI: 10.1097/PTS.0000000000000402
Assessment of Automating Safety Surveillance From Electronic Health Records: Analysis for the Quality and Safety Review System
Abstract
Background and objectives: In an effort to improve and standardize the collection of adverse event data, the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality is developing and testing a patient safety surveillance system called the Quality and Safety Review System (QSRS). Its current abstraction from medical records is through manual human coders, taking an average of 75 minutes to complete the review and abstraction tasks for one patient record. With many healthcare systems across the country adopting electronic health record (EHR) technology, there is tremendous potential for more efficient abstraction by automatically populating QSRS. In the absence of real-world testing data and models, which require a substantial investment, we provide a heuristic assessment of the feasibility of automatically populating QSRS questions from EHR data.
Methods: To provide an assessment of the automation feasibility for QSRS, we first developed a heuristic framework, the Relative Abstraction Complexity Framework, to assess relative complexity of data abstraction questions. This framework assesses the relative complexity of characteristics or features of abstraction questions that should be considered when determining the feasibility of automating QSRS. Questions are assigned a final relative complexity score (RCS) of low, medium, or high by a team of clinicians, human factors, and natural language processing researchers.
Results: One hundred thirty-four QSRS questions were coded using this framework by a team of natural language processing and clinical experts. Fifty-five questions (41%) had high RCS and would be more difficult to automate, such as "Was use of a device associated with an adverse outcome(s)?" Forty-two questions (31%) had medium RCS, such as "Were there any injuries as a result of the fall(s)?" and 37 questions (28%) had low RCS, such as "Did the patient deliver during this stay?" These results suggest that Blood and Hospital Acquired Infections-Clostridium Difficile Infection (HAI-CDI) modules would be relatively easier to automate, whereas Surgery and HAI-Surgical Site Infection would be more difficult to automate.
Conclusions: Although EHRs contain a wealth of information, abstracting information from these records is still very challenging, particularly for complex questions, such as those concerning patient adverse events. In this work, we developed a heuristic framework, which can be applied to help guide conversations around the feasibility of automating QSRS data abstraction. This framework does not aim to replace testing with real data but complement the process by providing initial guidance and direction to subject matter experts to help prioritize, which abstraction questions to test for feasibility using real data.
Copyright © 2017 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.
Conflict of interest statement
The authors disclose no conflict of interest.
Similar articles
-
Folic acid supplementation and malaria susceptibility and severity among people taking antifolate antimalarial drugs in endemic areas.Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2022 Feb 1;2(2022):CD014217. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD014217. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2022. PMID: 36321557 Free PMC article.
-
Facilitating clinical research through automation: Combining optical character recognition with natural language processing.Clin Trials. 2022 Oct;19(5):504-511. doi: 10.1177/17407745221093621. Epub 2022 May 24. Clin Trials. 2022. PMID: 35608136
-
Electronic Health Record (EHR) Abstraction.Perspect Health Inf Manag. 2021 Mar 15;18(Spring):1g. eCollection 2021 Spring. Perspect Health Inf Manag. 2021. PMID: 34035788 Free PMC article.
-
Electronic self-reporting of adverse events for patients undergoing cancer treatment: the eRAPID research programme including two RCTs.Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; 2022 Feb. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; 2022 Feb. PMID: 35138783 Free Books & Documents. Review.
-
Natural Language Processing and Its Implications for the Future of Medication Safety: A Narrative Review of Recent Advances and Challenges.Pharmacotherapy. 2018 Aug;38(8):822-841. doi: 10.1002/phar.2151. Epub 2018 Jul 22. Pharmacotherapy. 2018. PMID: 29884988 Review.
Cited by
-
Risk Management and Patient Safety in the Artificial Intelligence Era: A Systematic Review.Healthcare (Basel). 2024 Feb 27;12(5):549. doi: 10.3390/healthcare12050549. Healthcare (Basel). 2024. PMID: 38470660 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Natural language processing systems for pathology parsing in limited data environments with uncertainty estimation.JAMIA Open. 2020 Oct 14;3(3):431-438. doi: 10.1093/jamiaopen/ooaa029. eCollection 2020 Oct. JAMIA Open. 2020. PMID: 33381748 Free PMC article.
-
Automating the Capture of Structured Pathology Data for Prostate Cancer Clinical Care and Research.JCO Clin Cancer Inform. 2019 Jul;3:1-8. doi: 10.1200/CCI.18.00084. JCO Clin Cancer Inform. 2019. PMID: 31314550 Free PMC article.
-
A comparison of two structured taxonomic strategies in capturing adverse events in U.S. hospitals.Health Serv Res. 2019 Jun;54(3):613-622. doi: 10.1111/1475-6773.13090. Epub 2018 Nov 25. Health Serv Res. 2019. PMID: 30474108 Free PMC article.
References
-
- Weissman JS, Schneider EC, Weingart SN, et al. Improving patient care annals of internal medicine comparing patient-reported hospital adverse events with medical record review: do patients know something that hospitals do not? Ann Intern Med . 2008;149:100–108.
-
- Pronovost P, Morlock LL, Sexton B. Improving the value of patient safety reporting systems. In: Advances in patient safety: New directions and alternative approaches. Vol 1. Assessment . Rockville, MD: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality; 2008.
-
- Classen DC, Munier W, Verzier N, et al. Measuring patient safety: the Medicare patient safety monitoring system (past, present, and future). J Patient Saf . 2016.
-
- AHRQ. AHRQ common formats. https://www.pso.ahrq.gov/common . Accessed October 1, 2016.
-
- Henry J, Pylypchuk Y, Searcy T, et al. Adoption of electronic health record systems among US non-federal acute care hospitals: 2008–2015. The Office of National Coordinator for Health Information Technology. The Office of National Coordinator for Health Information Technology. Available at: https://www.healthit.gov/sites/default/files/briefs/2015_hospital_adopti... . Accessed June 12, 2017.
Publication types
MeSH terms
Grants and funding
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources
