Clinical documentation was developed to track a patient's condition and communicate the author's actions and thoughts to other members of the care team. Over time, other stakeholders have placed additional requirements on the clinical documentation process for purposes other than direct care of the patient. More recently, new information technologies, such as electronic health record (EHR) systems, have led to further changes in the clinical documentation process. Although computers and EHRs can facilitate and even improve clinical documentation, their use can also add complexities; new challenges; and, in the eyes of some, an increase in inappropriate or even fraudulent documentation. At the same time, many physicians and other health care professionals have argued that the quality of the systems being used for clinical documentation is inadequate. The Medical Informatics Committee of the American College of Physicians has undertaken this review of clinical documentation in an effort to clarify the broad range of complex and interrelated issues surrounding clinical documentation and to suggest a path forward such that care and clinical documentation in the 21st century best serve the needs of patients and families.

No abstract

Highly efficacious and tolerable treatments that cure hepatitis C viral (HCV) infection exist today, increasing the feasibility of disease elimination. However, large healthcare systems may not be fully prepared for supporting recommended actions due to knowledge gaps, inadequate infrastructure and uninformed policy direction. Additionally, the HCV cascade of care is complex, with many embedded barriers, and a significant number of patients do not progress through the cascade and are thus not cured. The aim of this retrospective cohort study was to evaluate a large healthcare system’s HCV screening rates, linkage to care efficiency, and provider testing preferences. Patients born during 1945–1965, not previously HCV positive or tested from within the Electronic Health Record (EHR), were identified given that three-quarters of HCV-infected persons in the United States are from this Birth Cohort (BC). In building this HCV testing EHR prompt, non-Birth Cohort patients were excluded as HCV-specific risk factors identifying this population were not usually captured in searchable, structured data fields. Once completed, the BC prompt was released to primary care locations. From July 2015 through December 2016, 11.5% of eligible patients (n = 9,304/80,556) were HCV antibody tested (anti-HCV), 3.8% (353/9,304) anti-HCV positive, 98.1% (n = 311/317) HCV RNA tested, 59.8% (n = 186/311) HCV RNA positive, 86.6% (161/186) referred and 76.4% (n = 123/161) seen by a specialist, and 34.1% (n = 42/123) cured of their HCV. Results from the middle stages of the cascade in this large healthcare system are encouraging; however, entry into the cascade–HCV testing–was performed for only 11% of the birth cohort, and the endpoint–HCV cure–accounted for only 22% of all infected. Action is needed to align current practice with recommendations for HCV testing and treatment given that these are significant barriers toward elimination.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

Objectives: CDC reported that 45% of Hepatitis C (HCV) infected people denied known risk factors. Electronic health record RF-based, non-Birth Cohort (born outside of years 1945–1965) screening is challenging as risk factors are often input as nonsearchable data. Testing non-Birth Cohort patients solely based on risk factors has the potential to miss a substantial number of HCV infected patients. The aim was to determine the HCV antibody positive prevalence who would have been missed had providers only followed risk factor based screening recommendations. Methods: A 1:3 case-control retrospective nested chart review was conducted. HCV risk factors and opioid prescriptions were manually abstracted from the Electronic Health Record; other variables were collected using Explorys. In July 2015 HCV screening data was collected on non-Birth Cohort patients who were HCV tested across MedStar Health, as a presumptive marker for high risk. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression models were utilized to determine HCV antibody positive predictors. Results: Eighteen (23%) HCV antibody positive and 123 (49%) HCV antibody negative had no identified risk factors; 6 (33%) HCV antibody positive reported risk factors only after a positive test result. There was a significant interaction between age over 40 and opioid prescription use; these groups were 11× more likely to be HCV antibody positive (CI95 1.6–74.8). Conclusions: HCV testing solely based on presence of risk factors in non-Birth Cohort patients has the potential to miss a significant number of HCV antibody positive patients. Given patient- and provider-level barriers in elucidating risk factors, universal HCV antibody screening may be warranted.

Background & objectives Screening for hepatitis C virus is the first critical decision point for preventing morbidity and mortality from HCV cirrhosis and hepatocellular carcinoma and will ultimately contribute to global elimination of a curable disease. This study aims to portray the changes over time in HCV screening rates and the screened population characteristics following the 2020 implementation of an electronic health record (EHR) alert for universal screening in the outpatient setting in a large healthcare system in the US mid-Atlantic region. Methods Data was abstracted from the EHR on all outpatients from 1/1/2017 through 10/31/2021, including individual demographics and their HCV antibody (Ab) screening dates. For a limited period centered on the implementation of the HCV alert, mixed effects multivariable regression analyses were performed to compare the timeline and characteristics of those screened and un-screened. The final models included socio-demographic covariates of interest, time period (pre/post) and an interaction term between time period and sex. We also examined a model with time as a monthly variable to look at the potential impact of COVID-19 on screening for HCV. Results Absolute number of screens and screening rate increased by 103% and 62%, respectively, after adopting the universal EHR alert. Patients with Medicaid were more likely to be screened than private insurance (ORadj 1.10, 95% CI: 1.05, 1.15), while those with Medicare were less likely (ORadj 0.62, 95% CI: 0.62, 0.65); and Black (ORadj 1.59, 95% CI: 1.53, 1.64) race more than White. Conclusions Implementation of universal EHR alerts could prove to be a critical next step in HCV elimination. Those with Medicare and Medicaid insurance were not screened proportionately to the national prevalence of HCV in these populations. Our findings support increased screening and re-testing efforts for those at high risk of HCV.