Feasibility of automatic evaluation of clinical rules in general practice

Abstract

PurposeTo assess the extent to which clinical rules (CRs) can be implemented for automatic evaluation of quality of care in general practice. MethodsWe assessed 81 clinical rules (CRs) adapted from a subset of Assessing Care of Vulnerable Elders (ACOVE) clinical rules, against Dutch College of General Practitioners (NHG) data model. Each CR was analyzed using the Logical Elements Rule Method(LERM). LERM is a stepwise method of assessing and formalizing clinical rules for decision support. Clinical rules that satisfied the criteria outlined in the LERM method were judged to be implementable in automatic evaluation in general practice. ResultsThirty-three out of 81 (40.7%) Dutch-translated ACOVE clinical rules can be automatically evaluated in electronic medical record systems. Seven out of 7 CRs (100%) in the domain of diabetes can be automatically evaluated, 9/17 (52.9%) in medication use, 5/10 (50%) in depression care, 3/6 (50%) in nutrition care, 6/13 (46.1%) in dementia care, 1/6 (16.6%) in end of life care, 2/13 (15.3%) in continuity of care, and 0/9 (0%) in the fall-related care. Lack of documentation of care activities between primary and secondary health facilities and ambiguous formulation of clinical rules were the main reasons for the inability to automate the clinical rules. ConclusionApproximately two-fifths of the primary care Dutch ACOVE-based clinical rules can be automatically evaluated. Clear definition of clinical rules, improved GP database design and electronic linkage of primary and secondary healthcare facilities can improve prospects of automatic assessment of quality of care. These findings are relevant especially because the Netherlands has very high automation of primary care.