This article requires a subscription to view the full text. If you have a subscription you may use the login form below to view the article. Access to this article can also be purchased.
Abstract
Objective To conduct a data validation study encompassing an accuracy assessment of the data extraction process for the Axon Registry®.
Methods Data elements were abstracted from electronic health records (EHRs) by an external auditor (IQVIA) using virtual site visits at participating sites. IQVIA independently calculated Axon Registry quality measure performance rates based on American Academy of Neurology measure specifications and logic using Axon Registry data. Agreement between Axon Registry and IQVIA data elements and measure performance rates was calculated. Discordance was investigated to elucidate underlying systemic or idiosyncratic reasons for disagreement.
Results Nine sites (n = 720 patients; n = 80 patients per site) with diversity among EHR vendor, practice settings, size, locations, and data transfer method were included. There was variable concordance between the data elements in the Axon Registry and those abstracted independently by IQVIA; high match rates (≥92%) were observed for discrete elements (e.g., demographics); lower match rates (<44%) were observed for elements with free text (e.g., plan of care). Across all measures, there was a 76% patient-level measure performance agreement between Axon Registry and IQVIA (κ = 0.53, p < 0.001).
Conclusion There was a range of concordance between data elements and quality measures in the Axon Registry and those independently abstracted and calculated by an independent vendor. Validation of data and processes is important for the Axon Registry as a clinical quality data registry that utilizes automated data extraction methods from the EHR. Implementation of remediation strategies to improve data accuracy will support the ability of the Axon Registry to perform accurate quality reporting.
Glossary
- AAN=
- American Academy of Neurology;
- EHR=
- electronic health record;
- MRN=
- medical record number
Footnotes
Go to Neurology.org/N for full disclosures. Funding information and disclosures deemed relevant by the authors, if any, are provided at the end of the article.
Editorial, page 833
- Received July 20, 2018.
- Accepted in final form January 24, 2019.
- © 2019 American Academy of Neurology
AAN Members
We have changed the login procedure to improve access between AAN.com and the Neurology journals. If you are experiencing issues, please log out of AAN.com and clear history and cookies. (For instructions by browser, please click the instruction pages below). After clearing, choose preferred Journal and select login for AAN Members. You will be redirected to a login page where you can log in with your AAN ID number and password. When you are returned to the Journal, your name should appear at the top right of the page.
AAN Non-Member Subscribers
Purchase access
Disputes & Debates: Rapid online correspondence
NOTE: All authors' disclosures must be entered and current in our database before comments can be posted. Enter and update disclosures at http://submit.neurology.org. Exception: replies to comments concerning an article you originally authored do not require updated disclosures.
- Stay timely. Submit only on articles published within 6 months of issue date.
- Do not be redundant. Read any comments already posted on the article prior to submission.
- 200 words maximum.
- 5 references maximum. Reference 1 must be the article on which you are commenting.
- 5 authors maximum. Exception: replies can include all original authors of the article.
- Submitted comments are subject to editing and editor review prior to posting.