» Articles » PMID: 21182790

Investigating Concordance in Diabetes Diagnosis Between Primary Care Charts (electronic Medical Records) and Health Administrative Data: a Retrospective Cohort Study

Overview
Publisher Biomed Central
Specialty Health Services
Date 2010 Dec 25
PMID 21182790
Citations 24
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background: Electronic medical records contain valuable clinical information not readily available elsewhere. Accordingly, they hold important potential for contributing to and enhancing chronic disease registries with the goal of improving chronic disease management; however a standard for diagnoses of conditions such as diabetes remains to be developed. The purpose of this study was to establish a validated electronic medical record definition for diabetes.

Methods: We constructed a retrospective cohort using health administrative data from the Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences Ontario Diabetes Database linked with electronic medical records from the Deliver Primary Healthcare Information Project using data from 1 April 2006-31 March 2008 (N = 19,443). We systematically examined eight definitions for diabetes diagnosis, both established and proposed.

Results: The definition that identified the highest number of patients with diabetes (N = 2,180) while limiting to those with the highest probability of having diabetes was: individuals with ≥2 abnormal plasma glucose tests, or diabetes on the problem list, or insulin prescription, or ≥2 oral anti-diabetic agents, or HbA1c ≥6.5%. Compared to the Ontario Diabetes Database, this definition identified 13% more patients while maintaining good sensitivity (75%) and specificity (98%).

Conclusions: This study establishes the feasibility of developing an electronic medical record standard definition of diabetes and validates an algorithm for use in this context. While the algorithm may need to be tailored to fit available data in different electronic medical records, it contributes to the establishment of validated disease registries with the goal of enhancing research, and enabling quality improvement in clinical care and patient self-management.

Citing Articles

Identification of patients undergoing chronic kidney replacement therapy in primary and secondary care data: validation study based on OpenSAFELY and UK Renal Registry.

Santhakumaran S, Fisher L, Zheng B, Mahalingasivam V, Plumb L, Parker E BMJ Med. 2024; 3(1):e000807.

PMID: 38645891 PMC: 11029353. DOI: 10.1136/bmjmed-2023-000807.


Electronic Medical Record-Based Case Phenotyping for the Charlson Conditions: Scoping Review.

Lee S, Doktorchik C, Martin E, DSouza A, Eastwood C, Shaheen A JMIR Med Inform. 2021; 9(2):e23934.

PMID: 33522976 PMC: 7884219. DOI: 10.2196/23934.


High concordance between chart review adjudication and electronic medical record data to identify prevalent and incident diabetes mellitus among persons with and without HIV.

McGinnis K, Justice A, Bailin S, Wellons M, Freiberg M, Koethe J Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf. 2020; 29(11):1432-1439.

PMID: 33006179 PMC: 7810212. DOI: 10.1002/pds.5111.


Impact of the diabetes Canada guideline dissemination strategy on dispensed vascular protective medications for older patients in Ontario, Canada: a linked EMR and administrative data study.

Greiver M, Kalia S, Moineddin R, Chen S, Duchen R, Rigobon A BMC Health Serv Res. 2020; 20(1):370.

PMID: 32357891 PMC: 7195730. DOI: 10.1186/s12913-020-05232-3.


Using Routine Data Sources to Feed an Immunization Information System for High-Risk Patients-A Pilot Study.

Martinelli D, Fortunato F, Iannazzo S, Cappelli M, Prato R Front Public Health. 2018; 6:37.

PMID: 29503815 PMC: 5820309. DOI: 10.3389/fpubh.2018.00037.


References
1.
Green C, Fortin P, MacLure M, Macgregor A, Robinson S . Information system support as a critical success factor for chronic disease management: Necessary but not sufficient. Int J Med Inform. 2006; 75(12):818-28. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2006.05.042. View

2.
Bennett C, Guo M, Dharmage S . HbA(1c) as a screening tool for detection of Type 2 diabetes: a systematic review. Diabet Med. 2007; 24(4):333-43. DOI: 10.1111/j.1464-5491.2007.02106.x. View

3.
Khan L, Mincemoyer S, Gabbay R . Diabetes registries: where we are and where are we headed?. Diabetes Technol Ther. 2009; 11(4):255-62. DOI: 10.1089/dia.2008.0057. View

4.
Cebul R . Using electronic medical records to measure and improve performance. Trans Am Clin Climatol Assoc. 2008; 119:65-75. PMC: 2394701. View

5.
Saydah S, Geiss L, Tierney E, Benjamin S, Engelgau M, Brancati F . Review of the performance of methods to identify diabetes cases among vital statistics, administrative, and survey data. Ann Epidemiol. 2004; 14(7):507-16. DOI: 10.1016/j.annepidem.2003.09.016. View