Skip to main content
medRxiv
  • Home
  • About
  • Submit
  • ALERTS / RSS
Advanced Search

Discrepancies in automated, electronic medical record-based CHA2DS2-VASc scores and clinician assessment for atrial fibrillation patients

Aubrey E. Jones, Zameer Abedin, Olesya Ilkun, Rebeka Mukherjee, Mingyuan Zhang, Michael White, Benjamin A. Steinberg, View ORCID ProfileRashmee U. Shah
doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.12.23.20248775
Aubrey E. Jones
1University of Utah College of Pharmacy
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Zameer Abedin
2University of Utah School of Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Olesya Ilkun
2University of Utah School of Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Rebeka Mukherjee
3University of Utah School of Medicine, Division of Cardiovascular Medicine
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Mingyuan Zhang
4University of Utah Health, Data Science Services
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Michael White
4University of Utah Health, Data Science Services
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Benjamin A. Steinberg
3University of Utah School of Medicine, Division of Cardiovascular Medicine
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Rashmee U. Shah
3University of Utah School of Medicine, Division of Cardiovascular Medicine
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Rashmee U. Shah
  • For correspondence: rashmee.shah@utah.edu
  • Abstract
  • Full Text
  • Info/History
  • Metrics
  • Data/Code
  • Preview PDF
Loading

Abstract

Background Clinical decision support tools for atrial fibrillation (AF) should include CHA2DS2- VASc scores to guide oral anticoagulant (OAC) treatment.

Objective We compared automated, electronic medical record (EMR) generated CHA2DS2- VASc scores to clinician-documented scores, and report the resulting proportions of patients in the OAC treatment group.

Methods Patients were included if they had both a clinician documented and EMR-generated CHA2DS2-VASc score on the same day. EMR scores were based on billing codes, left ventricular ejection fraction from echocardiograms, and demographics; documented scores were identified using natural language processing. Patients were deemed “re-classified” if the EMR score was ≥2 but the documented score was <2, and vice versa. For the overall cohort and subgroups (sex and age group), we compared mean scores using paired t-tests and re-classification rates using chi-squared tests.

Results Among 5,767 patients, the mean scores were higher using EMR compared to documented scores (4.05 [SD 2.1] versus 3.13 [SD 1.8]; p<0.01) for the full cohort, and all subgroups (p<0.01 for all comparisons). If EMR scores were used to determine OAC treatment instead of documented scores, 8.3% (n=479, p<0.01) of patients would be re-classified, with 7.2% moving into and 1.1% moving out of the treatment group. Among 2,322 women, 4.7% (n=109, p<0.01) would be re-classified, with 4.1% into and 0.7% out of the treatment group. Among 3,445 men, 10.7% (n=370, p<0.01) would be re-classified, with 9.2% into and 1.5% out of the treatment group. Among 2,060 patients <65 years old, 18.1% (n=372, p<0.01) would be re-classified, with 15.8% into and 2.3% out of the treatment group. Among 1,877 patients 65-74 years old, 5.4% (n=101, p<0.01) would be re-classified, with 4.4% into and 1.0% out of the treatment group. Among 1,830 patients ≥75 years old, <1% would move into to the treatment group and none would move out of the treatment group.

Conclusions EMR-based CHA2DS2-VASc scores were, on average, almost a full point higher than the clinician-documented scores. Using EMR scores in lieu of documented scores would result in a significant proportion of patients moving into the treatment group, with the highest re-classifications rates in men and patients <65 years old.

Competing Interest Statement

The authors have declared no competing interest.

Funding Statement

This work and Dr. Shah are supported by a grant from the National Heart Lung and Blood Institute, under award number K08HL136850.

Author Declarations

I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.

Yes

The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:

This retrospective study was approved by the University of Utah Institutional Review Board.

All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.

Yes

I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).

Yes

I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.

Yes

Footnotes

  • Funding/Conflicts of Interest: This work and Dr. Shah are supported by a grant from the National Heart Lung and Blood Institute, under award number K08HL136850.

  • Dr. Steinberg is supported by the National Heart, Lung, And Blood Institute of the National Institutes of Health under Award Number K23HL143156; receives research support from Boston Scientific and Janssen; consulting to Janssen, Bayer, and Merit Medical; speaking for NACCME (funded by Sanofi).

Data Availability

This protected patient information will not be available to others.

Copyright 
The copyright holder for this preprint is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. It is made available under a CC-BY-ND 4.0 International license.
Back to top
PreviousNext
Posted December 24, 2020.
Download PDF
Data/Code
Email

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word about medRxiv.

NOTE: Your email address is requested solely to identify you as the sender of this article.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Discrepancies in automated, electronic medical record-based CHA2DS2-VASc scores and clinician assessment for atrial fibrillation patients
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from medRxiv
(Your Name) thought you would like to see this page from the medRxiv website.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Share
Discrepancies in automated, electronic medical record-based CHA2DS2-VASc scores and clinician assessment for atrial fibrillation patients
Aubrey E. Jones, Zameer Abedin, Olesya Ilkun, Rebeka Mukherjee, Mingyuan Zhang, Michael White, Benjamin A. Steinberg, Rashmee U. Shah
medRxiv 2020.12.23.20248775; doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.12.23.20248775
Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
Citation Tools
Discrepancies in automated, electronic medical record-based CHA2DS2-VASc scores and clinician assessment for atrial fibrillation patients
Aubrey E. Jones, Zameer Abedin, Olesya Ilkun, Rebeka Mukherjee, Mingyuan Zhang, Michael White, Benjamin A. Steinberg, Rashmee U. Shah
medRxiv 2020.12.23.20248775; doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.12.23.20248775

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Subject Area

  • Cardiovascular Medicine
Subject Areas
All Articles
  • Addiction Medicine (70)
  • Allergy and Immunology (168)
  • Anesthesia (50)
  • Cardiovascular Medicine (451)
  • Dentistry and Oral Medicine (83)
  • Dermatology (55)
  • Emergency Medicine (157)
  • Endocrinology (including Diabetes Mellitus and Metabolic Disease) (191)
  • Epidemiology (5258)
  • Forensic Medicine (3)
  • Gastroenterology (195)
  • Genetic and Genomic Medicine (757)
  • Geriatric Medicine (80)
  • Health Economics (213)
  • Health Informatics (698)
  • Health Policy (358)
  • Health Systems and Quality Improvement (223)
  • Hematology (99)
  • HIV/AIDS (163)
  • Infectious Diseases (except HIV/AIDS) (5867)
  • Intensive Care and Critical Care Medicine (361)
  • Medical Education (104)
  • Medical Ethics (25)
  • Nephrology (83)
  • Neurology (764)
  • Nursing (43)
  • Nutrition (130)
  • Obstetrics and Gynecology (142)
  • Occupational and Environmental Health (231)
  • Oncology (479)
  • Ophthalmology (152)
  • Orthopedics (38)
  • Otolaryngology (95)
  • Pain Medicine (39)
  • Palliative Medicine (20)
  • Pathology (141)
  • Pediatrics (223)
  • Pharmacology and Therapeutics (136)
  • Primary Care Research (96)
  • Psychiatry and Clinical Psychology (862)
  • Public and Global Health (2011)
  • Radiology and Imaging (348)
  • Rehabilitation Medicine and Physical Therapy (158)
  • Respiratory Medicine (285)
  • Rheumatology (94)
  • Sexual and Reproductive Health (74)
  • Sports Medicine (76)
  • Surgery (109)
  • Toxicology (25)
  • Transplantation (29)
  • Urology (39)