The development and implementation of a computerized on-line obstetric record

A qualitative study of gestational weight gain counseling and tracking

Excessive gestational weight gain (GWG) predicts adverse pregnancy outcomes and later obesity risk for both mother and child. Women who receive GWG advice from their obstetric clinicians are more likely to gain the recommended amount, but many clinicians do not counsel their patients on GWG, pointing to the need for new strategies. Electronic medical records (EMRs) are a useful tool for tracking weight and supporting guideline-concordant care, but their use for care related to GWG has not been evaluated. We performed in-depth interviews with 16 obstetric clinicians from a multi-site group practice in Massachusetts that uses an EMR. We recorded, transcribed, coded, and analyzed the interviews using immersion-crystallization. Many respondents believed that GWG had "a lot" of influence on pregnancy and child health outcomes but that their patients did not consider it important. Most indicated that excessive GWG was a big or moderate problem in their practice, and that inadequate GWG was rarely a problem. All used an EMR feature that calculates total GWG at each visit. Many were enthusiastic about additional EMR-based supports, such as a reference for recommended GWG for each patient based on pre-pregnancy body mass index, a "growth chart" to plot actual and recommended GWG, and an alert to identify out-of-range gains, features which many felt would remind them to counsel patients about excessive weight gain. Additional decision support tools within EMRs would be well received by many clinicians and may help improve the frequency and accuracy of GWG tracking and counseling.

Using an electronic medical record to improve communication within a prenatal care network

OBJECTIVE

In 2002, the Institute of Medicine called for the introduction of information technologies in health care settings to improve quality of care. We conducted a review of hospital charts of women who delivered before and after the implementation of an intranet-based computerized prenatal record in an inner-city practice. Our objective was to assess whether the use of this record improved communication among the outpatient office, the ultrasonography unit, and the labor floor.

METHODS

The charts of patients who delivered in August 2002 and August 2003 and received their prenatal care at the Comprehensive Family Care Center at Montefiore Medical Center were analyzed. Data collected included the presence of a copy of the prenatal record in the hospital chart, the date of the last documented prenatal visit, and documentation of any prenatal ultrasonograms performed.

RESULTS

Forty-three charts in each group were available for review. The prenatal chart was absent in 16% of the charts of patients from August 2002 compared with only 2% in August 2003 charts (P < .05). Among charts with prenatal records available, the median length of time between the last documented prenatal visit and delivery was significantly longer for August 2002 patients compared with August 2003 patients (36 compared with 4 days, respectively, P < .001). All patients received prenatal ultrasonograms, but documentation of the ultrasonogram was missing from 16% of the August 2002 charts compared with none of the August 2003 charts (P = .01).

CONCLUSION

The use of a paperless, hospital intranet-based prenatal chart significantly improves communication among providers.

Effect of using protocols on medical care: randomised trial of three methods of taking an antenatal history

OBJECTIVE

To compare the effectiveness of three methods of taking an antenatal history on the quality of obstetric care.

DESIGN

Randomised controlled trial.

SETTING

Antenatal clinic of St James's University Hospital, Leeds.

SUBJECTS

2424 women attending the hospital for the first (booking) visit.

INTERVENTIONS

Histories were taken by midwives using an unstructured paper questionnaire, a structured paper questionnaire (incorporating a checklist), or an interactive computerised questionnaire (incorporating 101 clinical reminders).

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The number of clinical responses to factors arising from the antenatal booking history according to method of taking the history. Actions were categorised as medical and surgical, obstetric, personal, current symptoms and treatment, related to maternal age, and related to two common actions (cervical smear testing and dental hygiene) and were weighted for clinical importance by 10 obstetricians.

RESULTS

Overall the unstructured questionnaire generated 1063 actions, the structured questionnaire 1146, and the computerised questionnaire 1122. The clinical importance of these actions was lowest for the unstructured questionnaire (overall total value score 1987 v 2182 and 2110 for the structured and computerised questionnaires respectively). The structured questionnaire was better than the computerised questionnaire in the medical and surgical (total value score 191 v 184), obstetric (275 v 241), and personal (430 v 360) categories but inferior in the current symptoms category (179 v 191).

CONCLUSION

Structured questionnaires (computerised or paper) provide more and better information, and their use improves clinical response to risk factors. Computerised systems offer no further advantage in antenatal clinics.

Computerization of a colposcopy clinic

The first phase of a paperless computer record has been developed at Hammersmith Hospital. The system was designed around the work practices of the clinic staff. In this phase the data are collected on forms which replace the normal case notes. This information is entered onto an IBM compatible computer by the secretary using a quick, user-friendly program written in a dBASE dialect and compiled with Quicksilver. The program produces letters to patients and their doctors and a printed record of the clinic findings for the case sheet to replace the handwritten form. When funding for hardware becomes available the data will be entered directly into the system by the medical staff in the clinic. Clinic appointment lists are maintained and patients "lost to follow-up' can be identified. Ad hoc enquiries can be made using dBASE III Plus or any similar program. This approach has integrated the computerized recording of data in a colposcopy clinic with the normal work of the staff involved so that no extra effort is required from medical or secretarial staff. The immediate accessibility of patient data and the ability to audit the work of the clinic have been particularly useful.

Information systems and audit in antenatal care

The obstetric record as initiated at the antenatal booking clinic essentially identifies the degree of risk engendered in that pregnancy so that consequent obstetric and paediatric management is tailored appropriately. Whether carried by the patient or based in the hospital with a summary carried by the patient (shared-care card), this record should be exhaustive, the emphasis being on quality, not quantity, of information recorded. To obviate human error in history-taking, patient management or record transcription, we believe on-line computerization of patient records with spin-off paperwork to be the only patient management system to fulfil the above criteria. User-friendly software can be designed with highly branching programmes which provide clinical action suggestions in high-risk cases. Various 'error traps' enhance the accuracy of information recorded. Such systems can be operated by medical and midwifery staff with minimal keyboard skills and are well accepted by patients and staff. Inexpensive and versatile microcomputer networks are excellent for such systems. The operational effects are discussed. Audit means different things to different people and one's view on the subject depends on which definition is selected. Obstetricians are quick to take credit for instituting audit in the form of local and national data collection exercises, such as statistics on perinatal mortality, birthweight, etc. While these exercises certainly constitute observational studies, they cannot be used to make conclusions about the quality of care. There is no sound inference that can be made from a review of information contained in amalgamated databases of hospital statistics. Audit, as properly defined, hinges on inference: the inference that the quality of care was or was not of a high standard. Descriptive statistics, therefore, can be used to generate hypotheses but should not be used as a form of audit, at least not in obstetrics. Auditing the quality of care involves a study of process. It therefore depends on the assumption that we know which practices maximize beneficial outcomes. This exercise is therefore only relevant when we have good evidence linking the process of care with these outcomes. In some cases the accepted standard against which the process of care can be compared is very obvious. In other cases, however, the accepted standard should itself be audited to ensure that it is based on sound evidence.