Does Concordance Between Data Sources Vary By Medical Organization Type?

Published In: The American Journal of Managed Care, v. 13, no. 6, pt. 1, June 2007, p. 289-296

Posted on RAND.org on January 01, 2007

by Diana M. Tisnado, John L. Adams, Honghu H. Liu, Cheryl L. Damberg, Fang Ashlee Hu, Wen-Pin Chen, Katherine L. Kahn

Read More

Access further information on this document at www.ajmc.com

This article was published outside of RAND. The full text of the article can be found at the link above.

OBJECTIVE: Little is known about how concordance between patient self-report and medical record data varies with medical organization type. Given discrepancies in quality of care received across patient cohorts and organizations, it is important to understand the degree to which concordance metrics are robust across organization types. The authors tested whether concordance between patient self-report and medical record data would vary with medical organization type, controlling for patient demographic characteristics, health status, and domain of medical care. STUDY DESIGN: This observational study included 1270 patients sampled from 39 West Coast medical organizations with at least 1 of the following conditions: diabetes, ischemic heart disease, asthma or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, or low back pain. METHODS: Medical records and patient self-report were used to measure 50 items grouped into 4 conceptual domains: diagnosis, clinical services delivered, counseling and referral, and medication use. The authors evaluated the concordance between ambulatory medical record and patient survey data. The authors conducted multivariate logistic regressions to test the impact of medical organization type (medical groups vs independent practice associations), controlling for patient characteristics and domain of care, on 5 concordance measures. RESULTS: Independent practice associations were associated with worse agreement, survey specificity, and medical record sensitivity, and better medical record specificity compared with medical groups. CONCLUSIONS: The medical record and patient survey do not measure quality comparably across organization types. The authors recommend continued efforts to improve survey data collection across different patient populations and to improve the quality of clinical data.

This report is part of the RAND Corporation External publication series. Many RAND studies are published in peer-reviewed scholarly journals, as chapters in commercial books, or as documents published by other organizations.

Our mission to help improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis is enabled through our core values of quality and objectivity and our unwavering commitment to the highest level of integrity and ethical behavior. To help ensure our research and analysis are rigorous, objective, and nonpartisan, we subject our research publications to a robust and exacting quality-assurance process; avoid both the appearance and reality of financial and other conflicts of interest through staff training, project screening, and a policy of mandatory disclosure; and pursue transparency in our research engagements through our commitment to the open publication of our research findings and recommendations, disclosure of the source of funding of published research, and policies to ensure intellectual independence. For more information, visit www.rand.org/about/principles.

The RAND Corporation is a nonprofit institution that helps improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis. RAND's publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors.