The Impact of Structured and Standardized Documentation on Documentation Quality; a Multicenter, Retrospective Study.

The reuse of healthcare data for various purposes will become increasingly important in the future. To enable the reuse of clinical data, structured and standardized documentation is conditional. However, the primary purpose of clinical documentation is to support high-quality patient care. Therefore, this study investigated the effect of increased structured and standardized documentation on the quality of notes in the Electronic Health Record. A multicenter, retrospective design was used to assess the difference in note quality between 144 unstructured and 144 structured notes. Independent reviewers measured note quality by scoring the notes with the Qnote instrument. This instrument rates all note elements independently using and results in a grand mean score on a 0-100 scale. The mean quality score for unstructured notes was 64.35 (95% CI 61.30-67.35). Structured and standardized documentation improved the Qnote quality score to 77.2 (95% CI 74.18-80.21), a 12.8 point difference (p < 0.001). Furthermore, results showed that structured notes were significantly longer than unstructured notes. Nevertheless, structured notes were more clear and concise. Structured documentation led to a significant increase in note quality. Moreover, considering the benefits of structured data recording in terms of data reuse, implementing structured and standardized documentation into the EHR is recommended.

The Merits of Bilateral Application of Bone-Conduction Devices in Children With Bilateral Conductive Hearing Loss.

OBJECTIVES: This study aims to characterize lateralization of sounds and localization of sounds in children with bilateral conductive hearing loss (BCHL) when listening with either one or two percutaneous bone conduction devices (BCDs). DESIGN: Sound lateralization was measured with the minimum audible angle test in which children were asked to indicate from which of the two visible speakers the sound originated. Sound localization was measured with a test in which stimuli were presented from speakers that were not visible to the children. In the sound localization test, 150 ms broadband noise bursts were presented, and sound level was roved over a 20-dB range. Because speakers were not visible the localization response was not affected by any visual cue. The sound localization test provides a clear distinction between lateralization and localization of sounds. Ten children with congenital BCHL and one child with acquired BCHL participated. RESULTS: Both lateralization and sound localization were better with bilateral BCDs compared with the unilaterally aided conditions. In the bilateral BCD condition, lateralization was close to normal in nearly all the children. The localization test demonstrated lateralization rather than sound localization behavior when listening with bilateral BCDs. Furthermore, in the unilateral aided condition, stimuli presented at different sound levels were mainly perceived at the same location. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates that, in contrast to listening with two BCDs, children demonstrated difficulties in lateralization of sounds and in sound localization when listening with just one BCD (i.e., one BCD turned off). Because both lateralization and sound localization behavior were tested, it could be demonstrated that these children are more able to lateralize than localize sounds when listening with bilateral BCDs. The present study provides insight in (sub-optimal) sound localization capabilities of children with congenital BCHL in the unilateral-aided and bilateral-aided condition. Despite the sub-optimal results on sound localization, this study underlines the merits of bilateral application of BCDs in such children.