Structured Reporting of Medical Findings: Evaluation of a System in Gastroenterology

K. Kuhn; W. Gaus; J. G. Wechsler; P. Janowitz; J. Tudyka; W. Kratzer; W. Swobodnik; H. Ditschuneit

doi:10.1055/s-0038-1634885

Methods of Information in Medicine, Table of Contents

Methods Inf Med 1992; 31(04): 268-274
DOI: 10.1055/s-0038-1634885

Original Article

Schattauer GmbH

Structured Reporting of Medical Findings: Evaluation of a System in Gastroenterology

Authors

K. Kuhn

¹Dept. Internal Medicine II, University of Ulm, Germany
W. Gaus

²Dept. Clinical Documentation, University of Ulm, Germany
J. G. Wechsler

¹Dept. Internal Medicine II, University of Ulm, Germany
P. Janowitz

¹Dept. Internal Medicine II, University of Ulm, Germany
J. Tudyka

¹Dept. Internal Medicine II, University of Ulm, Germany
W. Kratzer

¹Dept. Internal Medicine II, University of Ulm, Germany
W. Swobodnik

³2nd Medical Clinic, Technical University of Munich, Germany
H. Ditschuneit

¹Dept. Internal Medicine II, University of Ulm, Germany

Abstract

Abstract:

A system using structured reporting of findings was developed for the preparation of medical reports and for clinical documentation purposes in upper abdominal sonography, and evaluated in the course of routine use. The evaluation focussed on the following parameters: completeness and correctness of the entered data, the proportion of free text, the validity and objectivity of the documentation, user acceptance, and time required. The completeness in the case of two clinically relevant parameters could be compared with an already existing database containing freely dictated reports. The results confirmed the hypothesis that, for the description of results of a technical examination, structured data reporting is a viable alternative to free-text dictation. For the application evaluated, there is even evidence of the superiority of a structured approach. The system can be put to use in related areas of application.

Key-Words

Documentation System - Evaluation - Structured Data

Full Text

References

REFERENCES
1 McDonald CJ, Tierney WM. Computerstored medical records. JAMA 1988; 251: 3433-40.
2 Scherrer JR. Medical languages: use, definition and processing in ward information systems (WIS). In: Adlassnig KP, Grabner G, Bengtsson S, Hansen R. eds. Medical Informatics Europe 1991. Berlin: Springer Verlag; 1991: 19-27.
3 Pietrzyk PM. A medical text analysis system for German – syntax analysis. Meth Inform Med 1991; 30: 275-83.
4 Gouveia-Oliveira A, Raposo VD, Azevedo AP. et al. SISCOPE: A multiuser information system for gastrointestinal endoscopy. Endoscopy 1991; 23: 272-7.
5 Ohmann C, Thon K, Stoltzing H. et al. The personal computer as an aid to documentation of upper gastrointestinal endoscopy. Theor Surg 1986; 01: 69-83.
6 Venables CW. An overview of computerized endoscopy record systems. In: Vicary FR. ed. Computers in Gastroenterology. London: Springer; 1988: 29-38.
7 Heyder N, Lederer P, Schmidt H, Grassme U. Der sonographische Befund aus dem Computer. Deutsches Arzteblatt 1988; 85: 443-8.
8 Meairs S, Böhnhof JA. Befunddokumentation per Computer. In: Loch EG, Nauth P. eds. Bildverarbeitung und Dokumentation in der Medizin. Stuttgart: chattauer Verlag; 1987: 55-7.
9 Nguyen HN, Walker S, Bode JC. Routineeinsatz eines computer-unterstutzten Dokumentationssystems fur die Osophago-Gastro-Duodenoskopie. Zeitschrift fur Gastroenterologie 1991; 29: 121-4.
10 Westerheim J, Aabakken L, Hofstad B, Larsen S, Osnes M. The SADE system: an endoscopic database manager. Endoscopy 1991; 23: 269-71.
11 Maratka Z. Terminology, definitions, and diagnostic criteria in digestive endoscopy. Scand J Gastroent. 1984 19. (Suppl. 103).
12 Kuhn K, Swobodnik W, Johannes RS. et al. The quality of gastroenterological reports based on free text dictation – an evaluation for endoscopy and ultrasonography. Endoscopy 1991; 23: 262-4.
13 Gouveia-Oliveira A, Raposo VD, Salgado NC. et al. Longitudinal comparative study on the influence of computers on reporting of clinical data. Endoscopy 1991; 23: 334-7.
14 Stoltzing H, Birkner B, Lindhar R. et al. Computergestiitzte Dokumentation bei der oberen gastrointestinalen Endoskopie: Erfahrungen bei der Routineanwendung in drei Kliniken. Zeitschrift für Gastroenterologie 1989; 27: 667-75.
15 Aabakken L, Westerheim J, Hofstad B, Larsen S, Osnes M. SADE database for endoscopic procedures: aspects of clinical use. Endoscopy 1991; 23: 269-71.
16 Kuhn K, Roesner D, Zemmler T. et al. A neural network expert system to support decisions in diagnostic imaging. In: Bankmann IN, Tsitlik JE. eds. Fourth Annal IEEE Symp on Computer-Based Medical Systems. Los Alamitos: IEEE Computer Society Press; 1991: 244-50.
17 Kuhn K, Swobodnik W, Zemmler T. et al. Die Entwicklung eines Systems zur elek-tronischen Befunddokumentation in der Sonographie. Ultraschall in der Klinischen Praxis 1991; 06: 52-6.
18 Johnson SB, Gottfried M. Sublanguage analysis as a basis for a controlled medical vocabulary. In: Kingsland LC. ed. Proc 13th Symp on Computer Applications in Medical Care 1989. Washington DC: IEEE Computer Society Press; 1989: 513-8.
19 Dixon WJ, Brown MB, Engelman L, Jennrich RI. BMDP Statistical Software Manual. Berkeley: University of California Press; 1990
20 Koran LM. The reliability of clinical methods, data and judgement. N Engl J Med 1975; 293: 624-6 695-700.
21 Fleiss JL. Statistical Methods for Rates and Proportions. New York: Wiley; 1981
22 Gjørup T. The kappa coefficient and the prevalence of a diagnosis. Meth Inform Med 1988; 27: 184-6.