Adol Esquivel

Accuracy and self correction of information received from an internet breast cancer list: content analysis.

Abstract Objectives To determine the prevalence of false or misleading statements in messages posted by internet cancer support groups and whether these statements were identified as false or misleading and corrected by other participants in subsequent postings. Design Analysis of content of postings. Setting Internet cancer support group Breast Cancer Mailing List. Main outcome measures Number of false or misleading statements posted from 1 January to 23 April 2005 and whether these were identified and corrected by participants in subsequent postings. Results 10 of 4600 postings (0.22%) were found to be false or misleading. Of these, seven were identified as false or misleading by other participants and corrected within an average of four hours and 33 minutes (maximum, nine hours and nine minutes). Conclusions Most posted information on breast cancer was accurate. Most false or misleading statements were rapidly corrected by participants in subsequent postings.

Electronic health record-based triggers to detect potential delays in cancer diagnosis

Background Delayed diagnosis of cancer can lead to patient harm, and strategies are needed to proactively and efficiently detect such delays in care. We aimed to develop and evaluate ‘trigger’ algorithms to electronically flag medical records of patients with potential delays in prostate and colorectal cancer (CRC) diagnosis. Methods We mined retrospective data from two large integrated health systems with comprehensive electronic health records (EHR) to iteratively develop triggers. Data mining algorithms identified all patient records with specific demographics and a lack of appropriate and timely follow-up actions on four diagnostic clues that were newly documented in the EHR: abnormal prostate-specific antigen (PSA), positive faecal occult blood test (FOBT), iron-deficiency anaemia (IDA), and haematochezia. Triggers subsequently excluded patients not needing follow-up (eg, terminal illness) or who had already received appropriate and timely care. Each of the four final triggers was applied to a test cohort, and chart reviews of randomly selected records identified by the triggers were used to calculate positive predictive values (PPV). Results The PSA trigger was applied to records of 292 587 patients seen between 1 January 2009 and 31 December 2009, and the CRC triggers were applied to 291 773 patients seen between 1 March 2009 and 28 February 2010. Overall, 1564 trigger positive patients were identified (426 PSA, 355 FOBT, 610 IDA and 173 haematochezia). Record reviews revealed PPVs of 70.2%, 66.7%, 67.5%, and 58.3% for the PSA, FOBT, IDA and haematochezia triggers, respectively. Use of all four triggers at the study sites could detect an estimated 1048 instances of delayed or missed follow-up of abnormal findings annually and 47 high-grade cancers. Conclusions EHR-based triggers can be used successfully to flag patient records lacking follow-up of abnormal clinical findings suspicious for cancer.

Improving outpatient safety through effective electronic communication: a study protocol

BackgroundHealth information technology and electronic medical records (EMRs) are potentially powerful systems-based interventions to facilitate diagnosis and treatment because they ensure the delivery of key new findings and other health related information to the practitioner. However, effective communication involves more than just information transfer; despite a state of the art EMR system, communication breakdowns can still occur. [1–3] In this project, we will adapt a model developed by the Systems Engineering Initiative for Patient Safety (SEIPS) to understand and improve the relationship between work systems and processes of care involved with electronic communication in EMRs. We plan to study three communication activities in the Veterans Health Administrations (VA) EMR: electronic communication of abnormal imaging and laboratory test results via automated notifications (i.e., alerts); electronic referral requests; and provider-to-pharmacy communication via computerized provider order entry (CPOE).AimOur specific aim is to propose a protocol to evaluate the systems and processes affecting outcomes of electronic communication in the computerized patient record system (related to diagnostic test results, electronic referral requests, and CPOE prescriptions) using a human factors engineering approach, and hence guide the development of interventions for work system redesign.DesignThis research will consist of multiple qualitative methods of task analysis to identify potential sources of error related to diagnostic test result alerts, electronic referral requests, and CPOE; this will be followed by a series of focus groups to identify barriers, facilitators, and suggestions for improving the electronic communication system. Transcripts from all task analyses and focus groups will be analyzed using methods adapted from grounded theory and content analysis.

Improving the Effectiveness of Electronic Health Record-Based Referral Processes

Electronic health records are increasingly being used to facilitate referral communication in the outpatient setting. However, despite support by technology, referral communication between primary care providers and specialists is often unsatisfactory and is unable to eliminate care delays. This may be in part due to lack of attention to how information and communication technology fits within the social environment of health care. Making electronic referral communication effective requires a multifaceted “socio-technical” approach. Using an 8-dimensional socio-technical model for health information technology as a framework, we describe ten recommendations that represent good clinical practices to design, develop, implement, improve, and monitor electronic referral communication in the outpatient setting. These recommendations were developed on the basis of our previous work, current literature, sound clinical practice, and a systems-based approach to understanding and implementing health information technology solutions. Recommendations are relevant to system designers, practicing clinicians, and other stakeholders considering use of electronic health records to support referral communication.

Comparability of digital photography with the ETDRS film protocol for evaluation of diabetic retinopathy severity.

PURPOSE To evaluate digital photography parameters affecting comparability with the Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) film protocol for diabetic retinopathy (DR) severity grading. METHODS ETDRS protocol photographs and four variations of digital images (uncompressed stereoscopic, compressed stereoscopic, uncompressed monoscopic, and uncompressed monoscopic wide-angle mosaic) of 152 eyes were independently evaluated by using ETDRS classifications. Digital formats were compared to film and each other for agreement on severity level, DR presence at ascending threshold, presence of the DR index lesion, and repeatability of grading. Study parameters included image resolution sufficient to distinguish small lesions, color balancing of digital images to film, documenting essential ETDRS classification retinal regions, similar magnification, and supplementary green-channel viewing. RESULTS The κ statistic was substantial or near substantial between all digital formats and film for classifying severity levels (κ = 0.59-0.62; κ(w) [linear weighted] = 0.83-0.87). The distribution of DR levels in all digital formats was not significantly different from that of the film (Bhapkar test, P = 0.09-0.44). The κ among digital formats for severity level was also substantial or near substantial (κ = 0.58-0.76, κ(w) = 0.82-0.92). Differences between digital formats and film for grading severity level, severity threshold, or index lesions were not significant. The repeatability of grading between readers using film and all digital formats was also similar. CONCLUSIONS Digital format variations compared favorably with film for DR classification. Translating film characteristics (resolution, color/contrast) and protocol (magnification, retinal regions) to digital equivalents and augmentation of full color with green-channel viewing most likely contributed to the results.

Digital versus film Fundus photography for research grading of diabetic retinopathy severity.

PURPOSE To assess agreement between digital and film photography for research classification of diabetic retinopathy severity. METHODS Digital and film photographs from a 152-eye cohort with a full spectrum of Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) severity levels were assessed for repeatability of grading within each image medium and for agreement on ETDRS discrete severity levels, ascending severity thresholds, and presence or absence of diabetic retinopathy index lesions, between digital and 35-mm slides (film). Digital photographs were color balanced to match film. RESULTS There was substantial agreement (κ = 0.61, κ(w) [linear weighted] = 0.87) in classification of ETDRS diabetic retinopathy severity levels between digital images and film. Marginal homogeneity analyses found no significant difference in frequency distributions on the severity scale (P = 0.21, Bhapkar test). The κ results ranged from 0.72 to 0.95 for presence or absence of eight ascending diabetic retinopathy severity thresholds. Repeatability of grading between readers viewing digital images was equal to or better than that obtained with film (pair-wise interreader κ for digital images ranged from 0.47 to 0.57 and for film from 0.43 to 0.57. The κ results for identifying diabetic retinopathy lesions ranged from moderate to almost perfect. Moderate agreement of intraretinal microvascular abnormalities and venous beading between digital images and film accounted for slightly lower concordance for severity thresholds ≥47 and for slightly lower interreader agreement within digital and film images at severity thresholds ≥43 and ≥47. CONCLUSIONS Under controlled circumstances, digital photography can equal the reliability of 35-mm slides for research classification of ETDRS severity level.

Releasing test results directly to patients: A multisite survey of physician perspectives.

OBJECTIVE To determine physician perspectives about direct notification of normal and abnormal test results. METHODS We conducted a cross-sectional survey at five clinical sites in the US and Australia. The US-based study was conducted via web-based survey of primary care physicians and specialists between July and October 2012. An identical paper-based survey was self-administered between June and September 2012 with specialists in Australia. RESULTS Of 1417 physicians invited, 315 (22.2%) completed the survey. Two-thirds (65.3%) believed that patients should be directly notified of normal results, but only 21.3% were comfortable with direct notification of clinically significant abnormal results. Physicians were more likely to endorse direct notification of abnormal results if they believed it would reduce the number of patients lost to follow-up (OR=4.98, 95%CI=2.21-1.21) or if they had personally missed an abnormal test result (OR=2.95, 95%CI=1.44-6.02). Conversely, physicians were less likely to endorse if they believed that direct notification interfered with the practice of medicine (OR=0.39, 95%CI=0.20-0.74). CONCLUSION Physicians we surveyed generally favor direct notification of normal results but appear to have substantial concerns about direct notification of abnormal results. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS Widespread use of direct notification should be accompanied by strategies to help patients manage test result abnormalities they receive.

Monoscopic versus stereoscopic retinal photography for grading diabetic retinopathy severity.

PURPOSE To assess agreement between monoscopic and stereoscopic photography for research classification of the severity of diabetic retinopathy (DR). METHODS Monoscopic digital (MD) images were compared with stereo digital (SD) and film (SF) photographs from a 152-eye cohort with full-spectrum Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) severity levels for agreement on severity level, DR presence with ascending severity threshold, presence of DR index lesions, and repeatability of grading. RESULTS There was substantial agreement classifying ETDRS DR severity levels between MD and SF (kappa = 0.65, kappa(w) [linear weighted] = 0.87), MD and SD (kappa = 0.66, kappa(w) = 0.87), and SD and SF (kappa = 0.62, kappa(w) = 0.86) images. Marginal homogeneity analyses found no significant difference between MD and SF images (P = 0.53, Bhapkar test). The kappa agreement between MD and SF ranged from 0.80 to 0.94 for the presence or absence of eight ascending DR severity thresholds. Repeatability between the readers of the MD images was equal to or better than that of the readers of SD or SF images. Severity threshold grading repeatability between readers was similar with the MD and SF images. The kappa agreement between MD and SF for identifying diabetic retinopathy lesions ranged from moderate to almost perfect. The kappa comparisons showed that performance of grading new vessels on the disc in MD images was slightly lower than that with the SF images. CONCLUSIONS Monoscopic photography can equal the reliability of stereo photography for full ETDRS DR severity scale grading.

Comparison of multiple stereoscopic and monoscopic digital image formats to film for diabetic macular edema evaluation

PURPOSE To assess agreement between evaluations of monoscopic and stereoscopic digital images versus stereo film photographs in diabetic macular edema (DME). METHODS A 152-eye group of digital monoscopic macular images (seven-field sets and wide-angle mosaics) were compared with digital stereoscopic images (uncompressed and compressed seven-field sets) and stereo 35-mm film photos (Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study protocol) for the presence of hard exudates (HE), retinal thickening (RT), clinically significant macular edema (CSME), and RT at the center of the macular (RTCM). RESULTS Agreement, according to the κ statistic, was almost perfect in identifying HE and RT between all digital formats and stereo film (HE, κ = 0.81-0.87; RT, κ = 0.87-0.92). Distribution in all digital formats was not significantly different from that in film (Bhapkar test: HE, P = 0.20-0.40; RT, P = 0.06-1.0). CSME and RTCM grading differences were either significant or trended toward significance. The readers detected CSME and RTCM in film images more often than in digital formats. In identifying DME features, agreement between evaluations of monoscopic digital formats and film was similar to that between stereo digital formats and film, and the performance of uncompressed images versus film was similar to that of compressed images versus film. Repeatability between readers was similar in evaluations of film and all digital formats. Repeatability in identifying RTCM was lower than that of other DME components in film and all digital formats. CONCLUSIONS Stereoscopic digital formats are equivalent to monoscopic for DME evaluation, but digital photography is not as sensitive as film in detecting CSME and RTCM.

Mosaics versus early treatment diabetic retinopathy seven standard fields for evaluation of diabetic retinopathy severity

Purpose: To compare agreement between mosaicked and seven field photographs for classification of the diabetic retinopathy (DR) severity. Methods: Mosaic digital (MosD) images were compared with seven field stereo film (7FF) and stereo digital (7FD) photographs from a 152-eye cohort with full-spectrum Early Treatment of Diabetic Retinopathy severity levels for agreement on severity level, DR presence with ascending severity thresholds, DR index lesion presence, and classification repeatability. Results: There was a substantial agreement classifying the Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study DR severity level between MosD and 7FF (kunweighted = 0.59, klinear weighted = 0.83), MosD and 7FD (κ = 0.62, κ weighted = 0.86), and 7FD and 7FF (κ = 0.62, κ weighted = 0.86) images. Marginal homogeneity analyses found no significant difference between MosD and 7FF (P = 0.44, Bhapkars test). Kappa between MosD and 7FF ranged from 0.75 to 0.91 for the presence or absence of DR at 8 ascending severity thresholds. Repeatability among readers using MosD images was similar to repeatability among those using 7FF or 7FD. Repeatability among readers using MosD and 7FF images at various severity thresholds was similar. Kappa between MosD and 7FF grading for identifying DR lesions ranged from 0.61 to 1.00. Conclusion: Mosaic images are generally comparable with standard seven-field photographs for classifying DR severity.