Cargando…
Use of large scale EHR data to evaluate A1c utilization among sickle cell disease patients
BACKGROUND: The glycated hemoglobin (A1c) test is not recommended for sickle cell disease (SCD) patients. We examine ordering patterns of diabetes-related tests for SCD patients to explore misutilization of tests among this underserved population. METHODS: We used de-identified electronic health rec...
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8449923/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34537047 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12911-021-01632-5 |
_version_ | 1784569516285493248 |
---|---|
author | Sivasankar, Shivani Cheng, An-Lin Lubin, Ira M. Lankachandra, Kamani Hoffman, Mark A. |
author_facet | Sivasankar, Shivani Cheng, An-Lin Lubin, Ira M. Lankachandra, Kamani Hoffman, Mark A. |
author_sort | Sivasankar, Shivani |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: The glycated hemoglobin (A1c) test is not recommended for sickle cell disease (SCD) patients. We examine ordering patterns of diabetes-related tests for SCD patients to explore misutilization of tests among this underserved population. METHODS: We used de-identified electronic health record (EHR) data in the Cerner Health Facts™ (HF) data warehouse to evaluate the frequency of A1c and fructosamine tests during 2010 to 2016, for 37,151 SCD patients from 393 healthcare facilities across the United States. After excluding facilities with no A1c data, we defined three groups of facilities based on the prevalence of SCD patients with A1c test(s): adherent facilities (no SCD patients with A1c test(s)), minor non-adherent facilities, major non-adherent facilities. RESULTS: We determined that 11% of SCD patients (3927 patients) treated at 393 facilities in the US received orders for at least one A1c test. Of the 3927 SCD patients with an A1c test, only 89 patients (2.3%) received an order for a fructosamine test. At the minor non-adherent facilities, 5% of the SCD patients received an A1c test while 58% of the SCD patients at the least adherent facilities had at least one A1c test. Overall, the percent of A1c tests ordered for SCD patients between 2010 and 2016 remained similar. CONCLUSIONS: Inappropriate A1c test orders among a sickle cell population is a significant quality gap. Interventions to advance adoption of professional recommendations that advocate for alternate tests, such as fructosamine, can guide clinicians in test selection to reduce this quality gap are discussed. The informatics strategy used in this work can inform other largescale analyses of lab test utilization using de-identified EHR data. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8449923 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-84499232021-09-20 Use of large scale EHR data to evaluate A1c utilization among sickle cell disease patients Sivasankar, Shivani Cheng, An-Lin Lubin, Ira M. Lankachandra, Kamani Hoffman, Mark A. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak Research BACKGROUND: The glycated hemoglobin (A1c) test is not recommended for sickle cell disease (SCD) patients. We examine ordering patterns of diabetes-related tests for SCD patients to explore misutilization of tests among this underserved population. METHODS: We used de-identified electronic health record (EHR) data in the Cerner Health Facts™ (HF) data warehouse to evaluate the frequency of A1c and fructosamine tests during 2010 to 2016, for 37,151 SCD patients from 393 healthcare facilities across the United States. After excluding facilities with no A1c data, we defined three groups of facilities based on the prevalence of SCD patients with A1c test(s): adherent facilities (no SCD patients with A1c test(s)), minor non-adherent facilities, major non-adherent facilities. RESULTS: We determined that 11% of SCD patients (3927 patients) treated at 393 facilities in the US received orders for at least one A1c test. Of the 3927 SCD patients with an A1c test, only 89 patients (2.3%) received an order for a fructosamine test. At the minor non-adherent facilities, 5% of the SCD patients received an A1c test while 58% of the SCD patients at the least adherent facilities had at least one A1c test. Overall, the percent of A1c tests ordered for SCD patients between 2010 and 2016 remained similar. CONCLUSIONS: Inappropriate A1c test orders among a sickle cell population is a significant quality gap. Interventions to advance adoption of professional recommendations that advocate for alternate tests, such as fructosamine, can guide clinicians in test selection to reduce this quality gap are discussed. The informatics strategy used in this work can inform other largescale analyses of lab test utilization using de-identified EHR data. BioMed Central 2021-09-18 /pmc/articles/PMC8449923/ /pubmed/34537047 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12911-021-01632-5 Text en © The Author(s) 2021 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data. |
spellingShingle | Research Sivasankar, Shivani Cheng, An-Lin Lubin, Ira M. Lankachandra, Kamani Hoffman, Mark A. Use of large scale EHR data to evaluate A1c utilization among sickle cell disease patients |
title | Use of large scale EHR data to evaluate A1c utilization among sickle cell disease patients |
title_full | Use of large scale EHR data to evaluate A1c utilization among sickle cell disease patients |
title_fullStr | Use of large scale EHR data to evaluate A1c utilization among sickle cell disease patients |
title_full_unstemmed | Use of large scale EHR data to evaluate A1c utilization among sickle cell disease patients |
title_short | Use of large scale EHR data to evaluate A1c utilization among sickle cell disease patients |
title_sort | use of large scale ehr data to evaluate a1c utilization among sickle cell disease patients |
topic | Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8449923/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34537047 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12911-021-01632-5 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT sivasankarshivani useoflargescaleehrdatatoevaluatea1cutilizationamongsicklecelldiseasepatients AT chenganlin useoflargescaleehrdatatoevaluatea1cutilizationamongsicklecelldiseasepatients AT lubiniram useoflargescaleehrdatatoevaluatea1cutilizationamongsicklecelldiseasepatients AT lankachandrakamani useoflargescaleehrdatatoevaluatea1cutilizationamongsicklecelldiseasepatients AT hoffmanmarka useoflargescaleehrdatatoevaluatea1cutilizationamongsicklecelldiseasepatients |