Data quality of electronic medical records in Manitoba: do problem lists accurately reflect chronic disease billing diagnoses?

Previous reviews of research on electronic health record (EHR) data quality have not focused on the needs of quality measurement. The authors reviewed empirical studies of EHR data quality, published from January 2004, with an emphasis on data attributes relevant to quality measurement. Many of the 35 studies reviewed examined multiple aspects of data quality. Sixty-six percent evaluated data accuracy, 57% data completeness, and 23% data comparability. The diversity in data element, study setting, population, health condition, and EHR system studied within this body of literature made drawing specific conclusions regarding EHR data quality challenging. Future research should focus on the quality of data from specific EHR components and important data attributes for quality measurement such as granularity, timeliness, and comparability. Finally, factors associated with poor or variability in data quality need to be better understood and effective interventions developed.

The Canadian Primary Care Sentinel Surveillance Network (CPCSSN) is Canada's first national chronic disease surveillance system based on electronic health record (EHR) data. The purpose of this study was to develop and validate case definitions and case-finding algorithms used to identify 8 common chronic conditions in primary care: chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), dementia, depression, diabetes, hypertension, osteoarthritis, parkinsonism, and epilepsy. Using a cross-sectional data validation study design, regional and local CPCSSN networks from British Columbia, Alberta (2), Ontario, Nova Scotia, and Newfoundland participated in validating EHR case-finding algorithms. A random sample of EHR charts were reviewed, oversampling for patients older than 60 years and for those with epilepsy or parkinsonism. Charts were reviewed by trained research assistants and residents who were blinded to the algorithmic diagnosis. Sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values (PPVs, NPVs) were calculated. We obtained data from 1,920 charts from 4 different EHR systems (Wolf, Med Access, Nightingale, and PS Suite). For the total sample, sensitivity ranged from 78% (osteoarthritis) to more than 95% (diabetes, epilepsy, and parkinsonism); specificity was greater than 94% for all diseases; PPV ranged from 72% (dementia) to 93% (hypertension); NPV ranged from 86% (hypertension) to greater than 99% (diabetes, dementia, epilepsy, and parkinsonism). The CPCSSN diagnostic algorithms showed excellent sensitivity and specificity for hypertension, diabetes, epilepsy, and parkinsonism and acceptable values for the other conditions. CPCSSN data are appropriate for use in public health surveillance, primary care, and health services research, as well as to inform policy for these diseases. © 2014 Annals of Family Medicine, Inc.

To systematically review measures of data quality in electronic patient records (EPRs) in primary care. Systematic review of English language publications, 1980-2001. Bibliographic searches of medical databases, specialist medical informatics databases, conference proceedings, and institutional contacts. Studies selected according to a predefined framework for categorising review papers. Reference standards and measurements used to judge quality. Bibliographic searches identified 4589 publications. After primary exclusions 174 articles were classified, 52 of which met the inclusion criteria for review. Selected studies were primarily descriptive surveys. Variability in methods prevented meta-analysis of results. Forty eight publications were concerned with diagnostic data, 37 studies measured data quality, and 15 scoped EPR quality. Reliability of data was assessed with rate comparison. Measures of sensitivity were highly dependent on the element of EPR data being investigated, while the positive predictive value was consistently high, indicating good validity. Prescribing data were generally of better quality than diagnostic or lifestyle data. The lack of standardised methods for assessment of quality of data in electronic patient records makes it difficult to compare results between studies. Studies should present data quality measures with clear numerators, denominators, and confidence intervals. Ambiguous terms such as "accuracy" should be avoided unless precisely defined.