COVID-19 patient cohort identification during the SARS-CoV-2 outbreak through a tertiary hospital Electronic Health Record alert system (Preprint)

2022 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nicolas Rosillo Ramirez ◽  
Aitana Morano-Vázquez ◽  
Andrés Mauricio Brandini-Romersi ◽  
Álvaro Cadenas-Manceñido ◽  
Miguel Pedrera- Jiménez ◽  
...  

BACKGROUND On 11th March 2020, the World Health Organization declared a pandemic caused by the coronavirus with 118.629 identified cases and 4.292 confirmed deaths. Up to date, 252 million cases and 5 million deaths have been identified as caused by COVID-19. An epidemic situation is characterized by an overload of patients suffering a particular clinical condition and needing acute medical attention in a short period. Usually, the pathogen n causing the epidemic is either new or emergent, and the knowledge a priori is limited. Information is crucial for public health authorities to establish policies to prevent transmission. Thus, the cycle of knowledge acquisition must be efficient and as short as possible. An interdisciplinary team adapted the electronic health record alert systems for real-time data tool collection for clinical characterization and epidemiological surveillance. This system has been working from the Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) first outbreak up to date OBJECTIVE To share the experience of handling COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 patients' circuits through an Electronic Health Record (EHR) alert system during the pandemic. This system allowed the creation of a COVID-19 hospitalized patient cohort, with implications in the hospital circuit management, patients risk stratification and secondary use for research projects in a period of high uncertainty. Additionally, its integration as an epidemiological surveillance tool favored the submission of updated information to public health authorities. METHODS Almost 30,000 alerts related to COVID-19 were activated in the EHR. Overall, the most frequent were “COVID-19 ruled out” (N = 12,438) followed by “COVID-19 Confirmed Case” (N = 8,999). Up to 13,106 patients (65.7%) were labeled with just one alert during their in-patient stay, while 6,857 (34.3%) received two or more labels. For the alert sequences, 96% were considered logical sequences, 3,1% as low-quality logic sequences, and less than 1% aberrant sequences. Although some temporal variations, all periods had a high rate of logical sequences achieving more than 95%. Preventive medicine professionals activated most COVID-19 alerts and acted as auditors for data quality. When possible, automatic alerts were in place, which became the most frequent. RESULTS Almost 30,000 alerts related to COVID-19 were activated in the EHR. Overall, the most frequent were “COVID-19 ruled out” (N = 12,438) followed by “COVID-19 Confirmed Case” (N = 8,999). Up to 13,106 patients (65.7%) were labeled with just one alert during their in-patient stay, while 6,857 (34.3%) received two or more labels. For the alert sequences, 96% were considered logical sequences, 3,1% as low-quality logic sequences, and less than 1% aberrant sequences. Although some temporal variations, all periods had a high rate of logical sequences achieving more than 95%. Preventive medicine professionals activated most COVID-19 alerts and acted as auditors for data quality. When possible, automatic alerts were in place, which became the most frequent. CONCLUSIONS The EHR integrated system favored in-hospital management of patients during the COVID-19 pandemic. It was helpful for both the institution and the health system, representing an example of interlevel integration. The performance was adequate and robust, with insights at different levels: infection control, patient safety, research, and pandemic response. Preventive Medicine teams should maximize EHR solutions for epidemiological surveillance. CLINICALTRIAL Not required.

2019 ◽  
Vol 35 (4) ◽  
pp. 139-145
Author(s):  
Anna Kabakov ◽  
Nathaniel J. Rhodes ◽  
Richard Wenzel

Background: Allergy information is commonly transcribed into an electronic health record (EHR) for all patients admitted to acute care hospital units by a licensed health care professional. The allergy history is utilized each time a new inpatient medication is prescribed to identify the patient’s risk of having an allergic reaction and/or anaphylaxis. There is potential for negative consequences in cases where the allergy history is incorrectly documented. Objective: The objective of this study was to assess the discordance between documented allergy information in the EHR and verbally reported allergy information from a patient interview. Methods: Prospective, observational, nonrandomized study performed within a 2-month period during the Spring of 2016. The study was performed at a teaching community hospital in Chicago, Illinois. A total of 270 patients were interviewed on the general medicine (n = 216) and headache (n = 54) units regarding their medication allergies and reactions. The outcomes were discordance among EHR-documented and verbally stated medication allergies and reactions. Results: The agreement across all medications and reactions between the EHR and patient self-reported interview was 80.9%. There were 31 reactions (6.7%) that were verbally reported by patients but were not documented in the EHR (omissions) and 57 reactions (12.4%) that were verbally reported but were incorrectly documented in the EHR (incorrect documentations). Only 20 out of the 264 verbally reported reactions (7.5%) met the study definition of anaphylaxis. The highest rate of incorrect documentations occurred with opiate agonists, and the highest rate of omissions occurred with anticonvulsants. EHR documentation was more likely to be incorrect among patients who reported gastrointestinal reactions and was more likely to be correct among patients who reported cutaneous reactions. Conclusion: There was a high rate of discordance amid EHR-documented and verbally stated medication allergies and reactions. Errors among opiate agonists, anticonvulsants, and sulfa drugs were most prevalent.


2011 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
pp. 18-22
Author(s):  
Rosemary Griffin

National legislation is in place to facilitate reform of the United States health care industry. The Health Care Information Technology and Clinical Health Act (HITECH) offers financial incentives to hospitals, physicians, and individual providers to establish an electronic health record that ultimately will link with the health information technology of other health care systems and providers. The information collected will facilitate patient safety, promote best practice, and track health trends such as smoking and childhood obesity.


2012 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert Schumacher ◽  
Robert North ◽  
Matthew Quinn ◽  
Emily S. Patterson ◽  
Laura G. Militello ◽  
...  

2011 ◽  
Vol 4 (0) ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael Klompas ◽  
Chaim Kirby ◽  
Jason McVetta ◽  
Paul Oppedisano ◽  
John Brownstein ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document