• JAMA network open · Oct 2020

    Comparative Study

    Association of Peer Comparison Emails With Electronic Health Record Documentation of Cancer Stage by Oncologists.

    • Anna D Sinaiko, Michael L Barnett, Marema Gaye, Margaret Soriano, Therese Mulvey, and Ephraim Hochberg.
    • Department of Health Policy and Management, Harvard T. H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, Massachusetts.
    • JAMA Netw Open. 2020 Oct 1; 3 (10): e2015935.

    ImportanceSystematically capturing cancer stage is essential for any serious effort by health systems to monitor outcomes and quality of care in oncology. However, oncologists do not routinely record cancer stage in machine-readable structured fields in electronic health records (EHRs).ObjectiveTo evaluate whether a peer comparison email intervention that communicates an oncologist's performance on documenting cancer stage relative to that of peer physicians was associated with increased likelihood that stage was documented in the EHR.Design, Setting, And ParticipantsThis 12-month, randomized quality improvement pilot study aimed to increase oncologist staging documentation in the EHR. The pilot study was performed at Massachusetts General Hospital Cancer Center from October 1, 2018, to September 30, 2019. Participants included 56 oncologists across 3 practice sites who treated patients in the ambulatory setting and focused on diseases that use standardized staging systems. Data were analyzed from July 2, 2019, to March 5, 2020.InterventionsPeer comparison intervention with as many as 3 emails to oncologists during 6 months that displayed the oncologist's staging documentation rate relative to all oncologists in the study sample.Main Outcomes And MeasuresThe primary outcome was patient-level documentation of cancer stage, defined as the likelihood that a patient's stage of disease was documented in the EHR after the patient's first (eg, index) ambulatory visit during the pilot period.ResultsAmong the 56 oncologists participating (32 men [57%]), receipt of emails with peer comparison data was associated with increased likelihood of documentation of cancer stage using the structured field in the EHR (23.2% vs 13.0% of patient index visits). In adjusted analyses, this difference represented an increase of 9.0 (95% CI, 4.4-13.5) percentage points (P = .002) in the probability that a patient's cancer stage was documented, a relative increase of 69% compared with oncologists who did not receive peer comparison emails. The association increased with each email that was sent, ranging from a nonsignificant 4.0 (95% CI, -0.8 to 8.8) percentage points (P = .09) after the first email to a statistically significant 11.2 (95% CI, 4.9-17.4) percentage points (P = .003) after the third email . The association was concentrated among an oncologist's new patients (increase of 11.8 [95% CI, 6.2-17.4] percentage points; P = .001) compared with established patients (increase of 1.6 [95% CI, -2.9 to 6.1] percentage points; P = .44) and persisted for 7 months after the email communications stopped.Conclusions And RelevanceIn a quality improvement pilot trial, peer comparison emails were associated with a substantial increase in oncologist use of the structured field in the EHR to document stage of disease.

      Pubmed     Free full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…