Assessment of the Validity and Reliability of Three Systems of Medical Record Screening for Quality of Care Assessment
- 1 May 1998
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Wolters Kluwer Health in Medical Care
- Vol. 36 (5) , 748-751
- https://doi.org/10.1097/00005650-199805000-00014
Abstract
The authors compared the validity and reliability of three methods of medical record screening for detecting problems with quality of care of patients undergoing cardiovascular procedures: (1) the Uniform Clinical Data Set System (UCDSS), a software-based system developed by the Health Care Financing Administration (HCFA), (2) the HCFA generic screens, and (3) the Harvard Medical Practice Study (HMPS) screening criteria. A random sample of 451 medical records of inpatients who underwent cardiovascular procedures were screened by trained nurses and were also examined by physicians masked to screening results. Physicians' judgment provided a reference standard for validity assessment of screening applied by nurses. Agreement between pairs of physician reviews about the quality of care was fair or slight (Kappa The UCDSS computerized screens brought about substantial improvements in reliability of medical record screening, but needed to reduce its false-positive rate and to increase efficiency before it is used. From the perspective of continuous quality improvement, the UCDSS computerized algorithms provided a starting point to developing disease-specific patterns of practice to guide interventions.Keywords
This publication has 3 references indexed in Scilit:
- The health care quality improvement initiative. A new approach to quality assurance in MedicarePublished by American Medical Association (AMA) ,1992
- Watching the doctor-watchers. How well do peer review organization methods detect hospital care quality problems?Published by American Medical Association (AMA) ,1992
- Reliability and Validity of Judgments Concerning Adverse Events Suffered by Hospitalized PatientsMedical Care, 1989