Pragmatic MDR: a metadata repository with bottom-up standardization of medical metadata through reuse.

BACKGROUND: The variety of medical documentation often leads to incompatible data elements that impede data integration between institutions. A common approach to standardize and distribute metadata definitions are ISO/IEC 11179 norm-compliant metadata repositories with top-down standardization. To the best of our knowledge, however, it is not yet common practice to reuse the content of publicly accessible metadata repositories for creation of case report forms or routine documentation. We suggest an alternative concept called pragmatic metadata repository, which enables a community-driven bottom-up approach for agreeing on data collection models. A pragmatic metadata repository collects real-world documentation and considers frequent metadata definitions as high quality with potential for reuse. METHODS: We implemented a pragmatic metadata repository proof of concept application and filled it with medical forms from the Portal of Medical Data Models. We applied this prototype in two use cases to demonstrate its capabilities for reusing metadata: first, integration into a study editor for the suggestion of data elements and, second, metadata synchronization between two institutions. Moreover, we evaluated the emergence of bottom-up standards in the prototype and two medical data managers assessed their quality for 24 medical concepts. RESULTS: The resulting prototype contained 466,569 unique metadata definitions. Integration into the study editor led to a reuse of 1836 items and item groups. During the metadata synchronization, semantic codes of 4608 data elements were transferred. Our evaluation revealed that for less complex medical concepts weak bottom-up standards could be established. However, more diverse disease-related concepts showed no convergence of data elements due to an enormous heterogeneity of metadata. The survey showed fair agreement (Kalpha = 0.50, 95% CI 0.43-0.56) for good item quality of bottom-up standards. CONCLUSIONS: We demonstrated the feasibility of the pragmatic metadata repository concept for medical documentation. Applications of the prototype in two use cases suggest that it facilitates the reuse of data elements. Our evaluation showed that bottom-up standardization based on a large collection of real-world metadata can yield useful results. The proposed concept shall not replace existing top-down approaches, rather it complements them by showing what is commonly used in the community to guide other researchers.

Differences in the quality of oral anticoagulation therapy with vitamin K antagonists in German GP practices - results of the cluster-randomized PICANT trial (Primary Care Management for Optimized Antithrombotic Treatment).

BACKGROUND: In Germany, patients receiving oral anticoagulation (OAC) are often treated by general practitioners (GPs), and large proportions of patients receive vitamin K antagonists (VKAs). The quality of OAC in German GP practices, differences between various practices, and improvement potential through implementation of case management, have not yet been investigated satisfactorily. Based on results of a cluster-randomized controlled trial, we aimed to assess whether OAC quality can be improved, any variations between practices exist and determine practice- and patient-level factors. METHODS: The PICANT trial (2012-2015) was performed in 52 GP practices in Hesse, Germany. Adult patients with long-term indication for OAC received best practice case management in the intervention group. International normalized ratio (INR) values were recorded from anticoagulation passes. The Rosendaal method was used to calculate Time in Therapeutic Range (TTR) at patient level, and mean pooling to obtain center-specific TTR (cTTR) at practice level. The quality of OAC was assessed by TTR and cTTR. Linear model analyses were used to investigate associations between practice-/ patient-level factors and TTR. RESULTS: Inclusion of 736 patients (49.6% intervention and 50.4% control patients); 690 (93.8%) received phenprocoumon. Within 24 months, the TTR was 75.1% (SD 17.6) in the intervention versus 74.3% (SD 17.8) in the control group (p = 0.670). The cTTR averaged 75.1% (SD 6.5, range: 60.4 to 86.7%) in the intervention versus 74.3% (SD 7.2, range: 52.7 to 85.7%) in the control group (p = 0.668). At practice level, the TTR was significantly lower in practices with a male physician and certification in quality management. At patient level, the TTR was significantly higher in patients with moderate to high compliance, in men, and in patients that performed self-management. The TTR was significantly lower in patients with certain comorbidities, and who were hospitalized. CONCLUSIONS: The intervention did not effectively improve OAC quality compared to routine care. Quality of INR control was generally good, but considerable variation existed between GP practices. The variability indicates optimization potential in some practices. The demonstrated association between patient-level factors and TTR highlights the importance of considering patient characteristics that may impede achieving high quality therapeutic outcomes. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN registry, ISRCTN41847489 , registered 27 February 2012.

Comparing SDTM and FHIR® for Real World Data from Electronic Health Records for Clinical Trial Submissions.

Real world data for use in clinical trials is promising. We compared the SDTM for clinical trial data submission with FHIR® for routine documentation. After categorization of variables by relevance, clinically relevant SDTM items were mapped to FHIR®. About 30% in both were seen as clinically relevant. The majority of these SDTM items were mappable to FHIR® Observation resource.