How well does chart abstraction measure quality? A prospective comparison of standardized patients with the medical record

  • Luck J
  • Peabody J
  • Dresselhaus T
 et al. 
  • 74

    Readers

    Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
  • 220

    Citations

    Citations of this article.

Abstract

Purpose: Despite widespread reliance on chart abstraction for quality measurement, concerns persist about its reliability and validity. We prospectively evaluated the validity of chart abstraction by directly comparing it with the gold standard of reports by standardized patients. Subjects and methods: Twenty randomly selected general internal medicine residents and attending faculty physicians at the primary care clinics of two Veterans Affairs Medical Centers blindly evaluated and treated actor-patients (standardized patients) who had one of four common diseases: diabetes, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, coronary artery disease, or low back pain. Charts from the visits were abstracted using explicit quality criteria; standardized patients completed a checklist containing the same criteria. For each physician, quality was measured for two different cases of the four conditions (a total of 160 physician-patient encounters). We compared chart abstraction with standardized-patient reports for four aspects of the encounter: taking the history, examining the patient, making the diagnosis, and prescribing appropriate treatment. The sensitivity and specificity of chart abstraction were calculated. Results: The mean (± SD) chart abstraction score was 54% ± 9%, substantially less than the mean score on the standardized-patient checklist of 68% ± 9% (P

Get free article suggestions today

Mendeley saves you time finding and organizing research

Sign up here
Already have an account ?Sign in

Find this document

Authors

Cite this document

Choose a citation style from the tabs below

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free