3/23/2023 0 Comments Retrospective data![]() ![]() (See checklist, above.) The attending physician or clinic staff is responsible for completing the questions. Shown on this page is a checklist that can be placed on the front of all postoperative patients’ charts when they return to the surgical clinic for their first follow-up visit. When possible, get direct caregivers involved in documenting the outcome information necessary for performance measurement activities. This is especially true of outcome data that usually require a completed medical record as the information source. However, some data elements are more efficiently gathered after the patient’s discharge. If data gathering can be incorporated into the process of care - pathway variance reporting, routine patient care activities, and so on - then concurrent collection can be more cost-effective. In those organizations where medical staff leaders, physician advisors, or risk managers are willing to intervene immediately when quality problems are discovered, it is worthwhile to identify untoward events concurrently.Ĭoncurrent data collection also enhances infection control and case management referrals when necessary. The general trend seems to be toward using a blended - that is, both concurrent and retrospective - data-gathering system. If you cannot get medical staff and administrative support for concurrent problem solving, the identification of quality problems while the patient is hospitalized may prove to be a fruitless and frustrating activity. ![]() Users should determine their commitment to immediate intervention opportunities. ![]() Is concurrent review a reasonable choice for collection of performance measurement data, or do its drawbacks outweigh its benefits? In general, if performance measurement data are not analyzed until after the patient is discharged, concurrent collection may prove to be more problematic than advantageous. Most organizations find that concurrent review must be supplemented by retrospective review to ensure a complete data set for performance measurement purposes. Charts must be handled more than once to obtain the same amount of data that could have been obtained in one pass-through of the chart after discharge. In addition, concurrent review of patient records often is more costly than retrospective review in terms of staff time. Reviewers can miss the total picture when reviews are done concurrently. Other drawbacks include an inability to access records easily while patients are in the hospital, a shortage of work space at the nursing units, and a lack of information available in the medical record while the patient is still hospitalized, such as incomplete test results and missing pathology reports. Information must be provided after the fact to medical staff committees only then will some action be taken. Physicians often are reluctant to intervene during the episode of care. Many have decreased or eliminated concurrent data gathering in favor of retrospective collection of information.įirst, many organizations have found that concurrent intervention is possible but not feasible because medical staff leaders fail to cooperate. ability to obtain a working DRG for billing purposes.Īs hospitals gain more experience in the use of integrated and concurrent data collection systems, some are refining their original decision because of the shortcomings of concurrent data gathering.reduction of retrospective record review.timeliness of feedback to medical staff departments.Secondary benefits of concurrent review include: Concurrent interventional opportunities range from early identification of problems, which allows referrals to physician advisors and department chairmen, to improvements in documentation for utilization review and coding purposes. The greatest benefit of concurrent data collection is the ability to initiate interventions when problems are identified. This decision was made in hopes of minimizing staffing requirements, enhancing productivity, and ensuring timely intervention when utilization or quality problems were identified. In the past, many hospitals chose to integrate performance measurement data collection activities with the job of the utilization review or case management staff. Should 100% of data be gathered while the patient is hospitalized or undergoing active treatment? Is retrospective data collection more efficient? Should some data elements be collected concurrently and others retrospectively? The choice between the two is not easily made. Concurrent collection is an activity that occurs while the patient is hospitalized or undergoing active treatment, while retrospective collection occurs after the patient has left the facility. Over the past years, quality management professionals have debated the advantages of concurrent vs. Should data be gathered pre- or post-discharge? ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |