scholarly journals Use of electronic patient records for research: views of patients and staff in general practice

2012 ◽  
Vol 30 (2) ◽  
pp. 227-232 ◽  
Author(s):  
F. Stevenson ◽  
N. Lloyd ◽  
L. Harrington ◽  
P. Wallace
Keyword(s):  
General Practice ◽  
Patient Records ◽  
Electronic Patient Records

The impact of electronic patient records on workflow in general practice

2007 ◽  
Vol 13 (2) ◽  
pp. 155-160 ◽  
Author(s):  
Matthew R. Cauldwell ◽  
Caroline E. Beattie ◽  
Benita M. Cox ◽  
William J. Denby ◽  
Jessica A. Ede-Golightly ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
General Practice ◽  
Patient Records ◽  
Electronic Patient Records ◽  
The Impact

scholarly journals The languages of health in general practice electronic patient records: a Zipf’s law analysis

2014 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 2 ◽  
Author(s):  
Leila R Kalankesh ◽  
John P New ◽  
Patricia G Baker ◽  
Andy Brass
Keyword(s):  
General Practice ◽  
Zipf’S Law ◽  
Patient Records ◽  
Electronic Patient Records ◽  
Zipf's Law

scholarly journals Identifying patients who could benefit from palliative care by making use of the general practice information system: the Surprise Question versus the SPICT

2020 ◽  
Vol 37 (5) ◽  
pp. 641-647
Author(s):  
Matthijs P S van Wijmen ◽  
Bart P M Schweitzer ◽  
H R Pasman ◽  
Bregje D Onwuteaka-Philipsen
Keyword(s):  
Palliative Care ◽  
Information System ◽  
General Practice ◽  
Cohort Study ◽  
Patient Records ◽  
Electronic Patient Records ◽  
General Practices ◽  
Surprise Question ◽  
First Time ◽  
Digital Search

Abstract Objective We compared the performance of two tools to help general practitioners (GPs) identify patients in need of palliative care: the Surprise Question (SQ) and the Supportive and Palliative Care Indicators Tool (SPICT). Methods Prospective cohort study in two general practices in the Netherlands with a size of 3640 patients. At the start of the study the GPs selected patients by heart using the SQ. The SPICT was translated into a digital search in electronic patient records. The GPs then selected patients from the list thus created. Afterwards the GPs were interviewed about their experiences. The following year a record was kept of all the patients deceased in both practices. We analysed the characteristics of the patients selected and the deceased. We calculated the performance characteristics concerning predicting 1-year mortality. Results The sensitivity of the SQ was 50%, of the SPICT 57%; the specificity 99% and 98%. When analysing the deceased (n = 36), 10 died relatively suddenly and arguably could not be identified. Leaving out these 10, the sensitivity of the SQ became 69%, of the SPICT 81%. The GPs found the performance of the digital search quite time consuming. Conclusion The SPICT seems to be better in identifying patients in need of palliative care than the SQ. It is also more time consuming than the SQ. However, as the digital search can be performed more easily after it has been done for the first time, initial investments can repay themselves.

scholarly journals Measuring quality in primary healthcare – opportunities and weaknesses

2019 ◽  
Vol 58 (3) ◽  
pp. 101-103
Author(s):  
Eva Arvidsson ◽  
Rob Dijkstra ◽  
Zalika Klemenc-Ketiš
Keyword(s):  
Primary Care ◽  
General Practice ◽  
Quality Indicators ◽  
Pay For Performance ◽  
Easy Access ◽  
Patient Records ◽  
Electronic Patient Records ◽  
Local Improvement ◽  
Quality And Patient Safety ◽  
Access To Data

Abstract The easy access to data from electronic patient records has made using this type of data in pay-for-performance systems increasingly common. General practitioners (GPs) throughout Europe oppose this for several reasons. Not all data can be used to derive good quality indicators and quality indicators can’t reflect the broad scope of primary care. Qualities like person-centred care and continuity are particularly difficult to measure. The indicators urge doctors and nurses to spend too much time on the registration and administration of required data. However, quality indicators can be very useful as starting points for discussions about quality in primary care, with the purpose being to initiate, stimulate and support local improvement work. This led to The European Society for Quality and Patient Safety in General Practice (EQuiP) feeling the urge to clarify the different aspects of quality indicators by updating their statement on measuring quality in Primary Care. The statement has been endorsed by the Wonca Europe Council in 2018.

scholarly journals Clinical coding of long COVID in English primary care: a federated analysis of 58 million patient records in situ using OpenSAFELY

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alex Walker ◽  
Brian MacKenna ◽  
Peter Inglesby ◽  
Christopher Rentsch ◽  
Helen Curtis ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Primary Care ◽  
General Practice ◽  
British Journal ◽  
Operational Research ◽  
Review Paper ◽  
Full Detail ◽  
Patient Records ◽  
Electronic Patient Records ◽  
Clinical Coding

This OpenSAFELY report is a routine update of our peer-review paper published in the British Journal of General Practice on the Clinical coding of long COVID in English primary care: a federated analysis of 58 million patient records in situ using OpenSAFELY. It is a routine update of the analysis described in the paper. The data requires careful interpretation and there are a number of caveats. Please read the full detail about our methods and discussionis and the full analytical methods on this routine report are available on GitHub. OpenSAFELY is a new secure analytics platform for electronic patient records built on behalf of NHS England to deliver urgent academic and operational research during the pandemic. You can read more about OpenSAFELY on our website.

Electronic patient records in general practice

BMJ ◽  
2001 ◽  
Vol 323 (7322) ◽  
pp. 1184-1184
Author(s):  
P. J B. Brown ◽  
R. G Newcombe ◽  
D. G Altman ◽  
T. N Bryant ◽  
A. Hassey ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
General Practice ◽  
Patient Records ◽  
Electronic Patient Records
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document