Impact of an educational intervention on medical records documentation

Medical record-keeping educational interventions for medical students and residents: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Medical records, encompassing patient histories, progress notes, and more, play a crucial role in patient care and treatment, healthcare communication, medico-legal matters, and supporting financial documentation.

OBJECTIVE

Despite their significance, literature suggests inconsistencies in record quality and insufficient formal medical record-keeping education for medical students and residents. The study aimed to identify and evaluate the effectiveness of educational interventions by conducting a systematic review.

METHOD

A literature search covering 2003-2023 and review following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines was undertaken.

RESULTS

The literature search identified 44 relevant studies for inclusion. Educational methods, including lectures, feedback, workshops and discussions, addressed different components of the clinical record. The review revealed positive impacts on participant satisfaction, skills and attitudes related to record-keeping. However, some studies reported no significant positive outcomes, emphasising the need for higher-level evidence. Most studies adopted a single-group pretest-posttest design, presenting challenges in control group implementation. The Kirkpatrick evaluation levels were primarily at level 2, with few studies reaching level 3. The absence of studies at level 4 suggested the need for more robust evidence. Studies targeted medical residents more frequently than medical students, with a lack of interventions during the first year of medical education.

CONCLUSION

Despite limitations including language bias and methodological variations, the review revealed diverse educational strategies and highlighted the necessity for more randomised controlled trials and studies providing higher-level evidence to enhance clinical record-keeping skills among medical students and residents.

IMPLICATIONS

Medical record-keeping educational interventions can significantly improve the documentation skills of medical students and residents, thereby enhancing patient care, communication and medico-legal compliance.

Didactic Instruction's Impact on Medicolegal Quality of Radiation Oncology Resident Physician Documentation

Effective documentation serves as a cornerstone for communication and patient care, especially in radiation oncology (RO). Studies have shown room for improvement in documentation practices, and although documentation guidelines exist, it is uncertain if RO physicians are aware of or adhere to them. We aimed to assess RO resident physicians' medicolegal knowledge and the impact of an educational intervention on documentation practices. Grading rubrics for consultation and progress notes were created using guidelines, comprising of a fundamental score and total score. Residents from two institutions attended a didactic seminar on medicolegal documentation. Pre- and post-seminar, an electronic anonymous survey was used to assess resident knowledge and perspectives and random resident consultation and progress notes were scored. Mean documentation and survey item scores from pre- and post-seminar were compared. Fourteen resident physicians participated and completed surveys, and 48 consultation notes and 40 progress notes were analyzed. No participant had prior education specific to RO documentation, nor were any aware of available resources. Post-seminar, participants' medicolegal documentation knowledge significantly increased (86.61% vs. 95.54%, p = 0.001), as did the fundamental score (83.64% vs 89.29%, p = 0.041) and total scores of consultation notes (69.82% vs. 78.98%, p = 0.001) and total score of progress notes (55% vs. 75.19%, p < 0.001). Our seminar significantly enhanced residents' medicolegal knowledge and quality of documentation, and surveys revealed a lack of speciality specific documentation education. This combined with findings from other studies and participant opinions suggest that resident physicians would benefit from such training during residency.

Assessment Tools for Patient Notes in Medical Education: A Scoping Review

PURPOSE

Physician proficiency in clinical encounter documentation is a universal expectation of medical education. However, deficiencies in note writing are frequently identified, which have implications for patient safety, health care quality, and cost. This study aimed to create a compendium of tools for educators' practical implementation or future research.

METHOD

A scoping review was conducted using the Arksey and O'Malley framework. PubMed, Embase, Ovid All EBM Reviews, Web of Science, and MedEdPORTAL were searched for articles published from database inception to November 16, 2023, using the following search terms: documentation, note-writing, patient note, electronic health record note, entrustable professional activity 5 , and other terms. For each note-writing assessment tool, information on setting, section(s) of note that was assessed, tool properties, numbers and roles of note writers and graders, weight given, if used in grading, learner performance, and stakeholder satisfaction and feasibility was extracted and summarized.

RESULTS

A total of 5,257 articles were identified; 32 studies with unique tools were included in the review. Eleven studies (34.4%) were published since 2018. Twenty-two studies (68.8%) outlined creating an original assessment tool, whereas 10 (31.2%) assessed a curriculum intervention using a tool. Tools varied in length and complexity. None provided data on equity or fairness to student or resident note writers or about readability for patients. Note writers often had missing or incomplete documentation (mean [SD] total tool score of 60.3% [19.4%] averaged over 25 studies), often improving after intervention. Selected patient note assessment tool studies have been cited a mean (SD) of 6.3 (9.2) times. Approximately half of the tools (17 [53.1%]) or their accompanying articles were open access.

CONCLUSIONS

Diverse tools have been published to assess patient notes, often identifying deficiencies. This compendium may assist educators and researchers in improving patient care documentation.

Assessment of the quality of oral squamous cell carcinoma clinical records in oral surgery with Surgical Tool for Auditing Records (STAR) scoring

BACKGROUND

The Surgical Tool for Auditing Records scoring system [STAR] focuses on surgical record auditing with promising outcomes. It offers a structured approach to evaluating the quality of surgical notes.

AIMS AND OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to assess the effectiveness of the STAR in evaluating oral surgical records and identifying areas for improvement in documentation practices.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The data was obtained from the Dental Information Archival Software (DIAS) of our institution. The sample size was determined using G*Power 3.1.9.4 software. Fifty consecutive oral surgery clinical records of oral squamous cell carcinoma patients were evaluated using STAR. Each record was reviewed for adherence to documentation standards including Initial Assessment (10 points), Follow-up Entries (8 points), Consent Documentation (7 points), Anesthesia Report (7 points), Surgical Log (9 points), and Discharge Synopsis (9 points). compiling a total STAR score (50 points). The data was tabulated in Google Sheets. The descriptive statistics with inter-observer agreement and the mean score were recorded.

RESULTS

We observed that each of the 50 records received a score of 49/50 points on the STAR. Deductions were necessary in the Operative record section due to the lack of information regarding the sutures used.

CONCLUSION

To summarize, this study emphasizes the effectiveness of the STAR scoring system in evaluating the quality of oral surgical records. Identifying deficiencies, particularly in documenting operative details, can improve the completeness and accuracy of patient records. It can ultimately enhance patient care and facilitate better communication among healthcare professionals.

Are adverse events related to the completeness of clinical records? Results from a retrospective records review using the Global Trigger Tool

Clinical record (CR) is a tool for recording details about the patient and the most commonly used source of information for detecting adverse events (AEs). Its completeness is an indicator of the quality of care provided and may provide clues for improving professional practice. The primary aim of this study was to estimate the prevalence of AEs. The secondary aims were to determine the completeness of CRs and to examine the relationship between the two variables. We retrospectively reviewed randomly selected CRs of patients discharged from the Academic Hospital of Udine (Italy) in the departments of general surgery, internal medicine, and obstetrics between July and September 2020. Evaluation was performed using the Global Trigger Tool and a checklist to evaluate the completeness of CRs. The relationship between the occurrence of AEs and the completeness of CRs was analyzed using nonparametric tests. A binomial logistic regression analysis was also performed. We reviewed 291 CRs and identified 368 triggers and 56 AEs. Among them, 16.2% of hospitalizations were affected by at least one AE, with a higher percentage in general surgery. The most common AEs were surgical injuries (42.6%; 24) and care related (26.8%; 15). A significant positive correlation was found between the length of hospital stay and the number of AEs. The average completeness of CRs was 72.9% and was lower in general surgery. The decrease in CR completeness correlated with the increase in the total number of AEs (R = -0.14; P = .017), although this was not confirmed by regression analysis by individual departments. Our results seem to suggest that completeness of CRs may benefit patient safety, so ongoing education and involvement of health professionals are needed to maintain professional adherence to CRs.

Best practices for documentation of psychotropic drug-drug interactions in an adult psychiatric clinic

Introduction

Psychotropic drug-drug interactions (DDIs) contribute to adverse drug events, but many go undetected or unmanaged. Thorough documentation of potential DDIs can improve patient safety. The primary objective of this study is to determine the quality of and factors associated with documentation of DDIs in an adult psychiatric clinic run by postgraduate year 3 psychiatry residents (PGY3s).

Methods

A list of high-alert psychotropic medications was identified by consulting primary literature on DDIs and clinic records. Charts of patients prescribed these medications by PGY3 residents from July 2021 to March 2022 were reviewed to detect potential DDIs and assess documentation. Chart documentation of DDIs was noted as none, partial, or complete.

Results

Chart review identified 146 DDIs among 129 patients. Among the 146 DDIs, 65% were not documented, 24% were partially documented, and 11% had complete documentation. The percentage of pharmacodynamic interactions documented was 68.6% with 35.3% of pharmacokinetic interactions documented. Factors associated with partial or complete documentation included diagnosis of psychotic disorder (p = .003), treatment with clozapine (p = .02), treatment with benzodiazepine-receptor agonist (p < .01), and assumption of care during July (p = .04). Factors associated with no documentation include diagnosis of "other (primarily impulse control disorder)" (p < .01) and taking an enzyme-inhibiting antidepressant (p < .01).

Discussion

Investigators propose best practices for psychotropic DDI documentation: (1) description and potential outcome of DDI, (2) monitoring and management, (3) Patient education on DDI, and (4) patient response to DDI education. Strategies to improve DDI documentation quality include targeted provider education, incentives, and electronic medical record "DDI smart phrases."

Comparison of Teleconsultations and In-Person Consultations from Outpatients with Rheumatoid Arthritis, During the COVID-19 Pandemic: An Internal Audit of Medical Notes

Introduction: The objectives of this study were to compare the quality-of-care and compliance with medical record regulations between in-person consultations (QIP and CIP) and telephone consultations (QTP and CTP), from rheumatoid arthritis (RA) outpatients, during the COVID-19 pandemic, and to explore the impact of the consultation modality on the treatment. Methods: Data from 324 medical notes corresponding to rheumatic consultations between July and December 2020 were abstracted. Notes were selected considering a stratified (in-person and telephone consultations) random sampling strategy. QIP, CIP, QTP, and CTP were scored based on prespecified criteria as percentages, where higher numbers translated into better standards. Logistic regression analysis investigated the association between the consultation modality and the treatment recommendation (dependent variable). Results: There were 208 (64.2%) medical notes related to in-person consultations and 114 (35.2%) to telephone consultations. Overall, medical notes corresponded to middle-aged women with long-standing disease. QIP was superior to QTP (median, interquartile range): 60% (60-75%) versus 50% (25-60%), p ≤ 0.001, and differences were related to disease activity and prognosis documentation (81.3% vs. 34.5% and 55.8% vs. 33.6%, respectively, p ≤ 0.001) and the prolonged prescription of glucocorticoids with a documented management plan (58.5% vs. 30.4%, p = 0.045). Meanwhile, CIP and CTP were similar. Telephone consultation was a significant risk factor for no changes in the treatment recommendation (odds ratio: 2.113, 95% confidence interval: 1.284-3.479, p = 0.003), and results were consistent in the 142 medical notes with documented absence of disease activity. Conclusions: In the clinical context of RA, the quality-of-care provided by telephone consultations is below the standard of care and impacts the treatment.

Determining the requirements of a medical records electronic deficiency management system: a mixed-method study

Purpose

Despite the presence of electronic medical records systems, traditional paper-based methods are often used in many countries to document data and eliminate medical record deficiencies. These methods waste patient and hospital resources. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the traditional deficiency management system and determine the requirements of an electronic deficiency management system in settings that currently use paper records alongside electronic hospital information systems.

Design/methodology/approach

This mixed-method study was performed in three phases. First, the traditional process of medical records deficiency management was qualitatively evaluated. Second, the accuracy of identifying deficiencies by the traditional and redesigned checklists was compared. Third, the requirements for an electronic deficiency management system were discussed in focus group sessions.

Findings

Problems in the traditional system include inadequate guidelines, incomplete procedures for evaluating sheets and subsequent delays in activities. Problems also included the omission of some vital data elements and a lack of feedback about the documentation deficiencies of each documenter. There was a significant difference between the mean number of deficiencies identified by traditional and redesigned checklists (p < 0.0001). The authors proposed an electronic deficiency management system based on redesigned checklists with improved functionalities such as discriminating deficiencies based on the documenter’s role, providing systematic feedback and generating automatic reports.

Originality/value

Previous studies only examined the positive effect of audit and feedback methods to enhance the documentation of data elements in electronic and paper medical records. The authors propose an electronic deficiency management system for medical records to solve those problems. Health-care policymakers, hospital managers and health information systems developers can use the proposed system to manage deficiencies and improve medical records documentation.

Documentation of paediatric head injuries in a mixed metropolitan emergency department

OBJECTIVE

Head injuries are a common presentation of children to Australian EDs. Healthcare documentation is an important tool for enhancing patient care. In our study, we aimed to assess the adequacy of paediatric head injury documentation in a mixed ED.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of presentations to a mixed ED between 2017 and 2018. Children aged <16 years old with a primary diagnosis of head injury were included. Documentation items based on local head injury guidelines were assessed in both medical and nursing documentation. We compared cases aged <1 and ≥1 year.

RESULTS

There were 427 presentations that met the case definition. Medical documentation was present in 422 cases and nursing documentation in 310 cases. In combined medical and nursing documentation, items poorly documented include blood pressure (BP; 21.3%) and secondary survey (16.9%). In solely medical documentation, least commonly documented items are high-risk bony injuries (22.5%), high-risk soft tissue injuries (22.3%), seizure (22.0%) and non-accidental injury (3.6%). Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) was poorly documented in cases aged <1 year (10.9%, P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

The largest gaps in the documentation of paediatric head injuries were BP and paediatric GCS in infants. Future audits and educational strategies should focus on targeting clinically relevant items that are predictive of serious outcomes.

How to assure the quality of clinical records? A 7-year experience in a large academic hospital

INTRODUCTION

Clinical record (CR) is the primary tool used by healthcare workers (HCWs) to record clinical information and its completeness can help achieve safer practices. CR is the most appropriate source in order to measure and evaluate the quality of care. In order to achieve a safety climate is fundamental to involve a responsive healthcare workforce thorough peer-review and feedbacks. This study aims to develop a peer-review tool for clinical records quality assurance, presenting the seven-year experience in the evolution of it; secondary aims are to describe the CR completeness and HCWs' diligence toward recording information in it.

METHODS

To assess the completeness of CRs a peer-review tool was developed in a large Academic Hospital of Northern Italy. This tool included measurable items that examined different themes, moments and levels of the clinical process. Data were collected every three months between 2010 and 2016 by appointed and trained HCWs from 42 Units; the hospital Quality Unit was responsible for of processing and validating them. Variations in the proportion of CR completeness were assessed using Cochran-Armitage test for trends.

RESULTS

A total of 9,408 CRs were evaluated. Overall CR completeness improved significantly from 79.6% in 2010 to 86.5% in 2016 (p<0.001). Doctors' attitude showed a trend similar to the overall completeness, while nurses improved more consistently (p<0.001). Most items exploring themes, moments and levels registered a significant improvement in the early years, then flattened in last years. Results of the validation process were always above the cut-off of 75%.

CONCLUSIONS

This peer-review tool enabled the Quality Unit and hospital leadership to obtain a reliable picture of CRs completeness, while involving the HCWs in the quality evaluation. The completeness of CR showed an overall positive and significant trend during these seven years.

Checklist to aid young physicians managing obstetric emergencies in rural India: a quality improvement initiative

Background

The decision to admit or refer a patient presenting with an obstetric emergency is extremely crucial. In rural India, such decisions are usually made by young physicians who are less experienced and often miss relevant data points required for appropriate decision making. In our setting, before the quality improvement (QI) initiative, this information was recorded on loose blank sheets (first information sheets (FIS)) where an initial clinical history, physical examination and investigations were recorded. The mean FIS completeness, at baseline, was 73.95% (1–5 January 2020) with none of the FIS being fully complete. Our objective was to increase the FIS completeness to >90% and to increase the number of FIS that were fully complete over a 9-month period.

Methods

With the help of a prioritisation matrix, the QI team decided to tackle the problem of incomplete FIS. The team then used fishbone analysis and identified that the main causes of incomplete FIS were that the interns did not know what to document and would often forget some data points. Change ideas to improve FIS completeness were implemented using Plan-Do-Study-Act (PDSA) cycles, and ultimately, a checklist (referred to as antenatal care (ANC) checklist) was implemented. The study was divided into six phases, and after every phase, a few FIS were conveniently sampled for completeness.

Results

FIS completeness improved to 86.34% (p<0.001) in the post implementation phase (1 Feb to 31 August 2020), and in this phase, 69.72% of the FIS were documented using the ANC checklist. The data points that saw the maximum improvement were relating to the physical examination.

Conclusion

The use of ANC checklist increased FIS completeness. Interns with no prior clinical and QI experience can effectively lead and participate in QI initiatives. The ANC checklist is a scalable concept across similar healthcare settings in rural India.

Patient self-report versus medical records for smoking status and alcohol consumption at Aboriginal Community Controlled Health Services

OBJECTIVE

This study assessed the level of agreement, and predictors of agreement, between patient self-report and medical records for smoking status and alcohol consumption among patients attending one of four Aboriginal Community Controlled Health Service (ACCHSs).

METHODS

A convenience sample of 110 ACCHS patients self-reported whether they were current smokers or currently consumed alcohol. ACCHS staff completed a medical record audit for corresponding items for each patient. The level of agreement was evaluated using the kappa statistic. Factors associated with levels of agreement were explored using logistic regression.

RESULTS

The level of agreement between self-report and medical records was strong for smoking status (kappa=0.85; 95%CI: 0.75-0.96) and moderate for alcohol consumption (kappa=0.74; 95%CI: 0.60-0.88). None of the variables explored were significantly associated with levels of agreement for smoking status or alcohol consumption.

CONCLUSIONS

Medical records showed good agreement with patient self-report for smoking and alcohol status and are a reliable means of identifying potentially at-risk ACCHS patients. Implications for public health: ACCHS medical records are accurate for identifying smoking and alcohol risk factors for their patients. However, strategies to increase documentation and reduce missing data in the medical records are needed.

The influence of knowledge and perceptions of doctors on the quality of medical records

Background: Medical record reflects the quality of health services provided, which is influenced by existing resources, such as the doctors in charge. This study aims to determine whether doctors’ knowledge and perceptions affect the quality of the medical record.

Design and Methods: This is a quantitative and cross-sectional study carried out at Dr. Soetomo’s general and academic hospital Surabaya, Indonesia, in September and October 2020. Data were purposively obtained from a total of 45 doctors working at the hospital’s inpatient service surgery ward using the questionnaire and checklist medical record quality. Furthermore, ethical clearance and doctors’ informed consent were obtained, with the data statistically processed and analyzed by multiple linear regressions.

Results: The results and conclusion showed that doctors’ knowledge and perceptions of the quality of medical records were influence to medical record quality (p<0.05).

Conclusions: Hospital management needs to regularly increase doctors’ knowledge and perceptions by socializing and monitoring medical records.

Medical record documentation quality in the hospital accreditation

BACKGROUND

Medical records constitute a legal and professional document regarding the activities of medical staff in hospitals. This study was conducted with the aim of identifying the factors that affect the quality of medical records by implementing the accreditation models in hospitals.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This was a qualitative study. The data were collected via 28 semi-structured interviews. The research population included administrators and supervisors of nursing, medical records and accreditation in educational hospitals in Ahvaz, southwest Iran. Content analysis method was used to analyze the data. Descriptive statistics were used to present demographic characteristics of interviewees.

RESULTS

Facilitators and barriers to improve the quality of documentation were categorized into three levels: organizational, environmental, and personal, all achieved after the implementation of accreditation model in hospitals. Six facilitating factors were identified including organizational structure, organizational culture, management support, individual characteristics, and perceived benefits science and technology. The barriers included five factors including program structure, organizational structure, beliefs, justice, and individual characteristics.

CONCLUSIONS

The identification of factors affects the quality of medical record documentation and it seems that health managers and policymakers should take measures to improve the quality of medical recording documentation through strengthening the facilitators and overcoming the barriers in the program since the purpose of accreditation is to improve the quality in hospitals.