Video: Every Case Tells a Story| Webinar: ACR/CHEST ILD Guidelines in Practice

An official publication of the ACR and the ARP serving rheumatologists and rheumatology professionals

  • Conditions
    • Axial Spondyloarthritis
    • Gout and Crystalline Arthritis
    • Myositis
    • Osteoarthritis and Bone Disorders
    • Pain Syndromes
    • Pediatric Conditions
    • Psoriatic Arthritis
    • Rheumatoid Arthritis
    • Sjögren’s Disease
    • Systemic Lupus Erythematosus
    • Systemic Sclerosis
    • Vasculitis
    • Other Rheumatic Conditions
  • FocusRheum
    • ANCA-Associated Vasculitis
    • Axial Spondyloarthritis
    • Gout
    • Psoriatic Arthritis
    • Rheumatoid Arthritis
    • Systemic Lupus Erythematosus
  • Guidance
    • Clinical Criteria/Guidelines
    • Ethics
    • Legal Updates
    • Legislation & Advocacy
    • Meeting Reports
      • ACR Convergence
      • Other ACR meetings
      • EULAR/Other
    • Research Rheum
  • Drug Updates
    • Analgesics
    • Biologics/DMARDs
  • Practice Support
    • Billing/Coding
    • EMRs
    • Facility
    • Insurance
    • QA/QI
    • Technology
    • Workforce
  • Opinion
    • Patient Perspective
    • Profiles
    • Rheuminations
      • Video
    • Speak Out Rheum
  • Career
    • ACR ExamRheum
    • Awards
    • Career Development
  • ACR
    • ACR Home
    • ACR Convergence
    • ACR Guidelines
    • Journals
      • ACR Open Rheumatology
      • Arthritis & Rheumatology
      • Arthritis Care & Research
    • From the College
    • Events/CME
    • President’s Perspective
  • Search

Medical Records Don’t Always Match What Patients Say

Lisa Rapaport  |  February 2, 2017

(Reuters Health)—Symptoms that patients describe to doctors may not always be documented in electronic medical records, a small U.S. study suggests.

To test out how well the records match reality, researchers compared symptoms that 162 patients checked off on paper-based questionnaires with the information entered in patients’ electronic charts at eye clinics.

ad goes here:advert-1
ADVERTISEMENT
SCROLL TO CONTINUE

Roughly one-third of the time, data on blurry vision from the paper questionnaires didn’t match the electronic records, researchers report in JAMA Ophthalmology online Jan. 26. Symptom information also didn’t match for glare 48% of the time and was discordant in 27% of cases for pain and 25% for redness.

“Because the electronic health record allows researchers, payers and administrators to extract information from the medical record in a way that has never been previously possible, the implications of capturing patient data in the most accurate way becomes much more imperative,” said study co-author Dr. Paula Anne Newman-Casey, an ophthalmologist at the University of Michigan’s Kellogg Eye Center in Ann Arbor.

ad goes here:advert-2
ADVERTISEMENT
SCROLL TO CONTINUE

“The data captured in the electronic health record, if it is highly accurate, can be used to improve the quality of care that we deliver in a way that data captured on disparate paper charts never made possible,” Newman-Casey added by email.

In theory, the promise of electronic health records is that they can help improve the quality of care and lower costs in part by reducing room for errors. Most U.S. doctors and hospitals now use electronic records, though paper remains common for patient symptom questionnaires.

For the study, researchers examined paper copies of eye symptom questionnaires completed by patients visiting eye clinics between October 2015 and January 2016.

Patients rated the severity of common eye issues within the previous week.

Blurry vision was the most common complaint, but when patients reported blurry vision on the questionnaires, the electronic health record correctly noted this in 60 cases but failed to include it in 25 cases.

For patients who didn’t report blurry vision, the electronic records accurately noted this in 26 cases but mistakenly identified this as a problem for 29 patients.

Mismatches were also common for redness, pain, glare, itching, gritty sensation and sensitivity to light. More often than not, the error involved electronic records failing to capture symptoms patients noted on the paper questionnaires.

The study is small and only included patients within a single clinic system, the authors note.

Still, the results suggest that electronic health records may not always be reliable tools for clinicians treating patients or for researchers mining data, the authors conclude.

Page: 1 2 | Single Page
Share: 

Filed under:EMRsTechnology

Related Articles

    Case Report: A Rare Mimic of Giant Cell Arteritis

    November 14, 2021

    Syphilis is a chronic sexually transmitted disease (STD) caused by the spirochete Treponema pallidum. The clinical manifestations of syphilis are divided into four stages: 1) the primary stage, characterized by painless mucosal or cutaneous chancre at the site of infection that resolves spontaneously; 2) the secondary stage in which a generalized maculopapular rash and condyloma…

    Watch Those Eyes

    December 1, 2007

    What you need to know about Uveitis in Rheumatic Diseases

    Patient Can’t Always Access Complete Medical Records, Doctors Say

    May 24, 2016

    (Reuters Health)—Technology makes it possible for patients to access medical records online, but a thicket of legal issues may still keep people from always seeing everything in their chart, some doctors say. The Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) gives U.S. patients the right to access their medical records and control who else has…

    Patient Access to Electronic Health Records Yields Unexpected Results

    October 1, 2014

    Physicians find patients’ interaction with their digitized records can improve engagement, outcomes

  • About Us
  • Meet the Editors
  • Issue Archives
  • Contribute
  • Advertise
  • Contact Us
  • Copyright © 2025 by John Wiley & Sons, Inc. All rights reserved, including rights for text and data mining and training of artificial technologies or similar technologies. ISSN 1931-3268 (print). ISSN 1931-3209 (online).
  • DEI Statement
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms of Use
  • Cookie Preferences