Cargando…

The STAR score: a method for auditing clinical records

INTRODUCTION: Adequate medical note keeping is critical in delivering high quality healthcare. However, there are few robust tools available for the auditing of notes. The aim of this paper was to describe the design, validation and implementation of a novel scoring tool to objectively assess surgic...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Tuffaha, H, Amer, T, Jayia, P, Bicknell, C, Rajaretnam, N, Ziprin, P
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Royal College of Surgeons 2012
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3957501/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22613300
http://dx.doi.org/10.1308/003588412X13171221499865
_version_ 1782307797129494528
author Tuffaha, H
Amer, T
Jayia, P
Bicknell, C
Rajaretnam, N
Ziprin, P
author_facet Tuffaha, H
Amer, T
Jayia, P
Bicknell, C
Rajaretnam, N
Ziprin, P
author_sort Tuffaha, H
collection PubMed
description INTRODUCTION: Adequate medical note keeping is critical in delivering high quality healthcare. However, there are few robust tools available for the auditing of notes. The aim of this paper was to describe the design, validation and implementation of a novel scoring tool to objectively assess surgical notes. METHODS: An initial ‘path finding’ study was performed to evaluate the quality of note keeping using the CRABEL scoring tool. The findings prompted the development of the Surgical Tool for Auditing Records (STAR) as an alternative. STAR was validated using inter-rater reliability analysis. An audit cycle of surgical notes using STAR was performed. The results were analysed and a structured form for the completion of surgical notes was introduced to see if the quality improved in the next audit cycle using STAR. An education exercise was conducted and all participants said the exercise would change their practice, with 25% implementing major changes. RESULTS: Statistical analysis of STAR showed that it is reliable (Cronbach’s a = 0.959). On completing the audit cycle, there was an overall increase in the STAR score from 83.344% to 97.675% (p<0.001) with significant improvements in the documentation of the initial clerking from 59.0% to 96.5% (p<0.001) and subsequent entries from 78.4% to 96.1% (p<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The authors believe in the value of STAR as an effective, reliable and reproducible tool. Coupled with the application of structured forms to note keeping, it can significantly improve the quality of surgical documentation and can be implemented universally.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3957501
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2012
publisher Royal College of Surgeons
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-39575012014-03-19 The STAR score: a method for auditing clinical records Tuffaha, H Amer, T Jayia, P Bicknell, C Rajaretnam, N Ziprin, P Ann R Coll Surg Engl Surgery in General INTRODUCTION: Adequate medical note keeping is critical in delivering high quality healthcare. However, there are few robust tools available for the auditing of notes. The aim of this paper was to describe the design, validation and implementation of a novel scoring tool to objectively assess surgical notes. METHODS: An initial ‘path finding’ study was performed to evaluate the quality of note keeping using the CRABEL scoring tool. The findings prompted the development of the Surgical Tool for Auditing Records (STAR) as an alternative. STAR was validated using inter-rater reliability analysis. An audit cycle of surgical notes using STAR was performed. The results were analysed and a structured form for the completion of surgical notes was introduced to see if the quality improved in the next audit cycle using STAR. An education exercise was conducted and all participants said the exercise would change their practice, with 25% implementing major changes. RESULTS: Statistical analysis of STAR showed that it is reliable (Cronbach’s a = 0.959). On completing the audit cycle, there was an overall increase in the STAR score from 83.344% to 97.675% (p<0.001) with significant improvements in the documentation of the initial clerking from 59.0% to 96.5% (p<0.001) and subsequent entries from 78.4% to 96.1% (p<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The authors believe in the value of STAR as an effective, reliable and reproducible tool. Coupled with the application of structured forms to note keeping, it can significantly improve the quality of surgical documentation and can be implemented universally. Royal College of Surgeons 2012-05 2012-05 /pmc/articles/PMC3957501/ /pubmed/22613300 http://dx.doi.org/10.1308/003588412X13171221499865 Text en Copyright © 2013 Royal College of Surgeons http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Surgery in General
Tuffaha, H
Amer, T
Jayia, P
Bicknell, C
Rajaretnam, N
Ziprin, P
The STAR score: a method for auditing clinical records
title The STAR score: a method for auditing clinical records
title_full The STAR score: a method for auditing clinical records
title_fullStr The STAR score: a method for auditing clinical records
title_full_unstemmed The STAR score: a method for auditing clinical records
title_short The STAR score: a method for auditing clinical records
title_sort star score: a method for auditing clinical records
topic Surgery in General
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3957501/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22613300
http://dx.doi.org/10.1308/003588412X13171221499865
work_keys_str_mv AT tuffahah thestarscoreamethodforauditingclinicalrecords
AT amert thestarscoreamethodforauditingclinicalrecords
AT jayiap thestarscoreamethodforauditingclinicalrecords
AT bicknellc thestarscoreamethodforauditingclinicalrecords
AT rajaretnamn thestarscoreamethodforauditingclinicalrecords
AT ziprinp thestarscoreamethodforauditingclinicalrecords
AT tuffahah starscoreamethodforauditingclinicalrecords
AT amert starscoreamethodforauditingclinicalrecords
AT jayiap starscoreamethodforauditingclinicalrecords
AT bicknellc starscoreamethodforauditingclinicalrecords
AT rajaretnamn starscoreamethodforauditingclinicalrecords
AT ziprinp starscoreamethodforauditingclinicalrecords