Key result
A clinical audit of electronic medical records significantly improved the documentation of important symptoms in hypertensive patients from 2.7% at baseline to 38.6% at re-audit one year later.
Why the study?
Does auditing electronic medical records improve the documentation and management of hypertension in a primary healthcare setting?
Population
150 hypertensive patients at a primary healthcare center in Oman, mean age 54.8, 53.3% female.
Comparison
Clinical audit of electronic medical records in… vs 2007 baseline data
Design
Cohort
Follow-up
1 year
Authors
Loading...
EMR audit was associated with improved symptom documentation in hypertension; leaves open effects on management and outcomes.
Observational (n=150)
No
Does auditing electronic medical records improve the documentation and management of hypertension in a primary healthcare setting?
Absolute Event Rate: 38.6% vs 2.7%
p-value: p=<0.001
Conducting an audit of electronic medical records significantly improved the documentation of pertinent symptoms and renal function tests in hypertensive patients.
Al-Shidhani et al. (2011) conducted an observational in Hypertension (n=150). Clinical audit of electronic medical records vs. Baseline audit (2007) was evaluated on Documentation of important symptoms (chest pain, shortness of breath, dizziness) (p=<0.001). A clinical audit of electronic medical records significantly improved the documentation of important symptoms in hypertensive patients from 2.7% at baseline to 38.6% at re-audit one year later.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: