Dies ist eine Übersichtsseite mit Metadaten zu dieser wissenschaftlichen Arbeit. Der vollständige Artikel ist beim Verlag verfügbar.
Computer-Generated Vs. Physician-Documented History of Present Illness (HPI): Results of a Blinded Comparison
53
Zitationen
20
Autoren
2014
Jahr
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Healthcare delivery now mandates shorter visits with higher documentation requirements, undermining the patient-provider interaction. To improve clinic visit efficiency, we developed a patient-provider portal that systematically collects patient symptoms using a computer algorithm called Automated Evaluation of Gastrointestinal Symptoms (AEGIS). AEGIS also automatically "translates" the patient report into a full narrative history of present illness (HPI). We aimed to compare the quality of computer-generated vs. physician-documented HPIs. METHODS: We performed a cross-sectional study with a paired sample design among individuals visiting outpatient adult gastrointestinal (GI) clinics for evaluation of active GI symptoms. Participants first underwent usual care and then subsequently completed AEGIS. Each individual thereby had both a physician-documented and a computer-generated HPI. Forty-eight blinded physicians assessed HPI quality across six domains using 5-point scales: (i) overall impression, (ii) thoroughness, (iii) usefulness, (iv) organization, (v) succinctness, and (vi) comprehensibility. We compared HPI scores within patient using a repeated measures model. RESULTS: Seventy-five patients had both computer-generated and physician-documented HPIs. The mean overall impression score for computer-generated HPIs was higher than physician HPIs (3.68 vs. 2.80; P<0.001), even after adjusting for physician and visit type, location, mode of transcription, and demographics. Computer-generated HPIs were also judged more complete (3.70 vs. 2.73; P<0.001), more useful (3.82 vs. 3.04; P<0.001), better organized (3.66 vs. 2.80; P<0.001), more succinct (3.55 vs. 3.17; P<0.001), and more comprehensible (3.66 vs. 2.97; P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Computer-generated HPIs were of higher overall quality, better organized, and more succinct, comprehensible, complete, and useful compared with HPIs written by physicians during usual care in GI clinics.
Ähnliche Arbeiten
Machine Learning in Medicine
2019 · 3.812 Zit.
Systematic Review: Impact of Health Information Technology on Quality, Efficiency, and Costs of Medical Care
2006 · 3.176 Zit.
Effects of Computerized Clinical Decision Support Systems on Practitioner Performance and Patient Outcomes
2005 · 2.972 Zit.
Studies in health technology and informatics
2008 · 2.903 Zit.
An overview of clinical decision support systems: benefits, risks, and strategies for success
2020 · 2.742 Zit.