Enhanced identification of eligibility for depression research using an electronic medical record search engine

PURPOSE Electronic medical records (EMRs) have become part of daily practice for many physicians. Attempts have been made to apply electronic search engine technology to speed EMR review. This was a prospective, observational study to compare the speed and clinical accuracy of a medical record search engine vs. manual review of the EMR. METHODS Three raters reviewed 49 cases in the EMR to screen for eligibility in a depression study using the electronic medical record search engine (EMERSE). One week later raters received a scrambled set of the same patients including 9 distractor cases, and used manual EMR review to determine eligibility. For both methods, accuracy was assessed for the original 49 cases by comparison with a gold standard rater. RESULTS Use of EMERSE resulted in considerable time savings; chart reviews using EMERSE were significantly faster than traditional manual review (p=0.03). The percent agreement of raters with the gold standard (e.g. concurrent validity) using either EMERSE or manual review was not significantly different. CONCLUSIONS Using a search engine optimized for finding clinical information in the free-text sections of the EMR can provide significant time savings while preserving clinical accuracy. The major power of this search engine is not from a more advanced and sophisticated search algorithm, but rather from a user interface designed explicitly to help users search the entire medical record in a way that protects health information.

[1]  David A Hanauer,et al.  Informatics and the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program: automated processes could replace manual record review. , 2009, Journal of the American College of Surgeons.

[2]  Flora Malamateniou,et al.  A search engine for virtual patient records , 1999, Int. J. Medical Informatics.

[3]  Anders Grimsmo,et al.  Instant availability of patient records, but diminished availability of patient information: A multi-method study of GP's use of electronic patient records , 2008, BMC Medical Informatics Decis. Mak..

[4]  David A. Hanauer,et al.  EMERSE: The Electronic Medical Record Search Engine , 2006, AMIA.

[5]  Prakash M. Nadkarni,et al.  Model Formulation: Integrating Query of Relational and Textual Data in Clinical Databases: A Case Study , 2003, J. Am. Medical Informatics Assoc..

[6]  Rainu Kaushal,et al.  Electronic health records: which practices have them, and how are clinicians using them? , 2008, Journal of evaluation in clinical practice.

[7]  P. Shekelle,et al.  Systematic Review: Impact of Health Information Technology on Quality, Efficiency, and Costs of Medical Care , 2006, Annals of Internal Medicine.

[8]  Yasar A Ozcan,et al.  Do Hospitals With Electronic Medical Records (EMRs) Provide Higher Quality Care? , 2008, Medical care research and review : MCRR.

[9]  Farah Magrabi,et al.  What factors are associated with the integration of evidence retrieval technology into routine general practice settings? , 2007, Int. J. Medical Informatics.

[10]  Dario A. Giuse,et al.  StarTracker: An Integrated, Web-based Clinical Search Engine , 2003, AMIA.

[11]  F Wiesman,et al.  Information retrieval: an overview of system characteristics. , 1997, International journal of medical informatics.

[12]  M Michael Shabot,et al.  The electronic medical record, safety, and critical care. , 2005, Critical care clinics.