Skip to main content
Log in

The Feasibility of Using Automated Data to Assess Guideline-Concordant Care for Schizophrenia

  • Published:
Journal of Medical Systems Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This study examines the feasibility of using automated computer data versus written medical record data to identify patients receiving guideline concordant treatment for schizophrenia. Central elements of care derived from published practice guidelines for schizophrenia were examined for a convenience sample of 28 patients who received acute inpatient treatment. The results showed that automated data were superior to medical record data for identifying some elements of guideline-concordant treatment. Not only were the elements of care examined in this study clinically significant and within the current capabilities of the existing computer information system, but they are also likely related to patient outcomes. Implications for clinical care, future research, and health care quality improvement efforts are discussed.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

REFERENCES

  1. Gates, P.E., Think globally, act locally: An approach to implementation of clinical practice guidelines. J. Qual. Improvement 21:71–84, 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Halpern, J., The measurement of quality of care in the Veterans Health Administration. Med Care 34:MS55–MS68, 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Lobach, D.F., and Hammond, W.E., Computerized decision support based on a clinical practice guideline improves compliance with care standards. Am. J. Med. 102:89–98, 1997.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Agency for Health Care Policy and Research: Using Clinical Practice Guidelines To Evaluate Quality of Care: Volume 1/Issue, AHCPR #95-0045, 1995

  5. Wells, K.B., Rogers, W.H., Davis, L.M., et al., Quality of care for hospitalized depressed elderly patients before and after implementation of the Medicare prospective payment system. Am. J. Psychiatry 150:1799–1805, 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Kahn, K.L., Rogers, W.H., Rubenstein L.V., et al., Measuring quality of care with explicit process criteria before and after implementation of the DRG-based prospective payment system. JAMA 264:1969–1973, 1990.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Rubenstein, L.V., Kahn, K.L., Reinisch, E.J., et al., Changes in quality of care for five diseases measured by implicit review, 1981 to 1986. JAMA 264:1974–1979, 1990.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Samsa, G.P., Hanlon, J.T., Schmader, K.E., et al., A summated score for the medication appropriateness index: Development and assessment of clinimetric properties including content validity. J. Clin. Epidemiol. 47:891–896, 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Hartz, A.J., Sigmann, P., Guse, C., and Hagen, T.C., The value of the uniform clinical data set system (UCDSS) in a hospital setting. Jt. Comm. J. Q. Improv. 20:140–151, 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  10. McGlynn, E.A., and Asch, S.M. Developing a clinical performance measure. Am. J. Prev. Med. 14(Suppl):14–21, 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Eddy, D.M., Performance measurement: Problems and solutions. Health Aff. 17:7–25, 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Iezzoni, L.I., Assessing quality using administrative data. Ann. Intern. Med. 127:666–674, 1997.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Grover, F.L., Hammermeister, K.E., Shroyer, A.L.W., Quality initiatives and the power of the database: What they are and how they run. Soc. Thor. Surg. 60:1514–1521, 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Wray, N.P., Ashton, D.H., Kuykendall, D.H., and Hollingsworth, J.C., Using administrative databases to evaluate the quality of medical care: A conceptual framework. Soc. Sci. Med. 40:1707–1715, 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Dresser, M.V.B., Feingold, L., Rosenkrantz, S.L., and Coltin, K.L., Clinical quality measurement: Comparing chart review and automated methodologies. Med. Care 35:539–552, 1997.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Terreros, D.A., Robinson, V.J., and Hodson, W.L., Is real-time quality asessment of health care an achievable goal? Ann. Clin. Lab. Sci. 24:96–99, 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Stair, T.O., Reduction of redundant laboratory orders by access to computerized patient records. J. Emerg. Med. 16:895–897, 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Baldessarini, R.J., Katz, B., and Cotton, P., Dissimilar dosing with high-potency and low-potency neuroleptics. Am. J. Psychiatry 141:748–752, 1984.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Beckmann, H., and Laux, G., Guidelines for the dosage of antipsychotic drugs. Acta Psychiatr. Scand. [Suppl]82:63–66, 1990.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Lehman, A.F., and Steinwachs, D.M., Co-Investigators of the PORT Project: At issue: Translating research into practice: The schizophrenia patient outcomes research team (PORT) treatment recommendations. Schizophr. Bull. 24:1–10, 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  21. American Psychiatric Association: American Psychiatric Association: Practice guideline for the treatment of patients with schizophrenia. Am. J. Psychiatry 154:1–63, 1997.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Frances, A., Docherty, J.P., and Kahn, D.A., The expert concensus guideline series: Treatment of schizophrenia. J. Clin. Psychiatry 57:3–58, 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Spitzer, R.L., and Williams, J.B.W., User's guide for the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-III-R, American Psychiatric Press, Washington, D.C., 1990.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Johnson, R.E., and McFarland, B.H., Antipsychotic drug exposure in a health maintenance organization. Med. Care 31:432–444, 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  25. National Committee for Quality Assurance, A Roadmap for Information Systems: Evolving Systems to Support Performance Measurement, HEDIS 3.0/1998, Vol. 4, Washington: NCQA, 1997.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Young, A.S., Sullivan, G., Burnam, M.A., and Brook, R.H., Measuring the quality of outpatient treatment for schizophrenia. Arch. Gen. Psychiatry 55:611–617, 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Lehman, A.F., and Steinwachs, D.M., Survey Co-Investigators of the PORT Project: Patterns of usual care for schizophrenia: Initial results from the schizophrenia patient outcomes research team (PORT) client survey. Schizophr Bull. 24:11–20, 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Owen, R.R., Thrush, C.R.N., Kirchner, J.E., Fischer, E.P., and Booth, B.M., Performance measurement for schizophrenia: Adherence to guideline recommendations for antipsychotic dose, Manuscript submitted for publication.

  29. Stein, L.I., and Test, M.A., Alternative to mental hospital treatment: I. Conceptual model, treatment program and clinical evaluation. Arch. Gen. Psychiatry 37:392–397, 1980.

    Google Scholar 

  30. Kizer, K.W., Introduction and executive summary. VHA field reorganization—Report to Congress, title 38 U.S.C. 510(b), in Veterans Health Administration (VHA) (ed): Vision for Change—A Plan to Restructure the Veterans Health Administration. Veterans Health Administration, Washington, DC, 1995.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Hudson, T.J., Owen, R.R., Lancaster, A.E. et al. The Feasibility of Using Automated Data to Assess Guideline-Concordant Care for Schizophrenia. Journal of Medical Systems 23, 299–307 (1999). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1020526327467

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1020526327467

Navigation