首页> 美国卫生研究院文献>Preventing Chronic Disease >Peer Reviewed: Concordance Between Common Hypertension Control Algorithms in Electronic Medical Record Data
【2h】

Peer Reviewed: Concordance Between Common Hypertension Control Algorithms in Electronic Medical Record Data

机译:同行评审:电子病历数据中常见的高血压控制算法之间的一致性

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

Because quality improvement metrics and treatment guidelines are used to conduct research, evaluate care quality, and assess population health, they should, ideally, align. We used electronic medical record data to analyze variation between blood pressure control estimates calculated by using thresholds derived from National Quality Forum 0018 (NQF 0018) and Joint National Committee (JNC) treatment guidelines in a cohort of patients with hypertension. Percentage of patients with controlled blood pressure derived from each quality improvement or treatment guideline cutoff varied up to 16.1 percentage points. This variance demonstrates that discrepancies in blood pressure thresholds produce considerable variation in estimates; thus, treatment guidance and metrics should be selected carefully.
机译:由于质量改进指标和治疗指南用于进行研究,评估护理质量和评估人群健康,因此,理想情况下,它们应该保持一致。我们使用电子病历数据来分析血压控制估计值之间的差异,这些估计值是通过使用国家质量论坛0018(NQF 0018)和全国联合委员会(JNC)治疗指南得出的阈值计算得出的一组高血压患者。每次质量改善或治疗指南终止产生的血压可控患者百分比最高可变化16.1个百分点。这种差异表明血压阈值的差异会导致估计值的巨大差异;因此,应谨慎选择治疗指导和指标。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号