Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2018 Dec 1;25(12):1651-1656.
doi: 10.1093/jamia/ocy133.

Integrity of clinical information in computerized order requisitions for diagnostic imaging

Ronilda Lacson  1   2 , Romeo Laroya  1   2 , Aijia Wang  1 , Neena Kapoor  1   2 , Daniel I Glazer  2   3 , Atul Shinagare  1   2 , Ivan K Ip  1   2 , Sameer Malhotra  4 , Keith Hentel  5 , Ramin Khorasani  1   2
Affiliations

Integrity of clinical information in computerized order requisitions for diagnostic imaging

Ronilda Lacson et al. J Am Med Inform Assoc. .

Abstract

Objective: Assess information integrity (concordance and completeness of documented exam indications from the electronic health record [EHR] imaging order requisition, compared to EHR provider notes), and assess potential impact of indication inaccuracies on exam planning and interpretation.

Methods: This retrospective study, approved by the Institutional Review Board, was conducted at a tertiary academic medical center. There were 139 MRI lumbar spine (LS-MRI) and 176 CT abdomen/pelvis orders performed 4/1/2016-5/31/2016 randomly selected and reviewed by 4 radiologists for concordance and completeness of relevant exam indications in order requisitions compared to provider notes, and potential impact of indication inaccuracies on exam planning and interpretation. Forty each LS-MRI and CT abdomen/pelvis were re-reviewed to assess kappa agreement.

Results: Requisition indications were more likely to be incomplete (256/315, 81%) than discordant (133/315, 42%) compared to provider notes (p < 0.0001). Potential impact of discrepancy between clinical information in requisitions and provider notes was higher for radiologist's interpretation than for exam planning (135/315, 43%, vs 25/315, 8%, p < 0.0001). Agreement among radiologists for concordance, completeness, and potential impact was moderate to strong (Kappa 0.66-0.89). Indications in EHR order requisitions are frequently incomplete or discordant compared to physician notes, potentially impacting imaging exam planning, interpretation and accurate diagnosis. Such inaccuracies could also diminish the relevance of clinical decision support alerts if based on information in order requisitions.

Conclusions: Improved availability of relevant documented clinical information within EHR imaging requisition is necessary for optimal exam planning and interpretation.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

See all "Cited by" articles

References

    1. HHS. The Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health (HITECH) Act. Federal Register 2009; 74 (209): 56123–31. - PubMed
    1. Kohane IS, Churchill SE, Murphy SN.. A translational engine at the national scale: informatics for integrating biology and the bedside. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2012; 19 (2): 181–5. - PMC - PubMed
    1. PUBLIC LAW 113—93—PROTECTING ACCESS TO MEDICARE ACT OF 2014. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, Vol02512 (2014). 2014; Public Law 113-93.
    1. Pevnick JM, Herzik AJ, Li X, et al. Effect of computerized physician order entry on imaging study indication. J Am Coll Radiol 2015; 12 (1): 70–4. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Kim M, Kaplan SJ, Mitchell SH, et al. The effect of computerized physician order entry template modifications on the administration of high-risk medications in older adults in the emergency department. Drugs Aging 2017; 34: 793–801. - PubMed

Publication types