middleware (Mirth) was used that was interfaced
with the central demographic registry in order to
extract the MPI code of patients (not present among
the fields of the departmental system). In particular,
the matching algorithm used as keywords:
1. The date of birth of the patient
2. The patient's last name
3. The patient's name
They were the only fields in the legacy system of the
department that could guarantee the uniqueness of
the patient.
The algorithm is actually a step-by-step
procedure; from the first matching, mentioned
above, the MPI code for about 73% of patients was
recovered.
In the next step we made a matching targeted to
transcription errors. In particular, we used substrings
starting from the same search keys used earlier. To
ensure uniqueness in this case, in addition to the
surname, name and date of birth, the fields "address"
and "telephone number" (when they were present
and complete) were used. At the end of this process
the MPI code of more than 90% of patients was
recovered (67664 of 74971 initial patients ).
Through this system, so it was possible to store
medical reports and patient records of that
department in the central repository, without any
false positive or false negative.
4 CONCLUSIONS
Usually Hospital Information Systems are rather
fragmented and consist of isolated computerized
structures including heterogeneous hardware
equipment and software applications. Consequently
the concept of medical appropriateness cannot be
separated from the computerization of hospital
activities and from the integration of these different
health information systems.
The access to a central repository that provides
information from different departments (e.g.
laboratory, radiology, anatomy pathology etc.) can
facilitate patient's data retrieval and sharing. It can
allow a Medical Doctor to know the patient's
medical history, the clinical exams of performed by
different structures and provide proper diagnosis
with minimal requests for improper medical exams.
These information can also be used both as variables
by the algorithms supporting physicians on
evaluating the appropriateness of requests and also
to better investigate on exams (for example,
diagnostic images such as CT and MRI) through
operations such as chiaroscuro, zoom etc.
Obviously the use of middleware is essential to
"standardize" the exchange of data and reduce risk
factors related to the circulation of information
between the different legacy systems and the central
repository.
We have assessed how Mirth, in addition to
providing an open source solution, ensures the easy
and independent interoperability between
applications, providing transparency in the flow of
data and adapting to changes in hospital structures,
IT infrastructures and in clinical data.
Thanks to the use of anagraphic MPI, the
middleware can access a separate centralized
anagraphic registry (but related to the anagraphic
registry of the hospital) and can make available to
all the different hospital systems a number of
functions via the web for the management of
demographic data.
Moreover the idMPI, in addition to connecting
the patient ID with that related to any other access at
any hospital structures, adapts to different logics and
hospital settings and ensures adherence to the
requirements of the Italian Health System (uniquely
identifying the patient, avoiding homonyms and
unifying double anagraphic positions).
In summary, it is therefore essential to invest in
information technology, in order to improve the
management of health resources, to integrate the
multiple clinical information, in the optics to provide
an adequate health care to each patient
(personalized medicine) reducing improper requests,
as well as to obtain reliable information about
medical exams through a simple Web browser.
REFERENCES
Tamarin A., 2015. I tagli alla sanità sono ormai
inevitabili. Ma almeno si usino i costi standard.
www.quotidianosanita.it.
Fassari L., 2015. Appropriatezza prescrittiva. Cambiano
misure per 180 prestazioni. Tac, Rmn, test generici ed
esami di laboratorio. Ecco il documento.
www.quotidianosanita.it.
R J Lock., J Clin Pathol, 2004. Rational requesting or
rationing testing?
Lippi G., 2015. Effectiveness of a computerized alert
system based on re-testing intervals for limiting the
inappropriateness of laboratory test requests.
Verstappen WH, van der Weijden T, Sijbrandij J, Smeele
I, Hermsen J, Grimshaw J, et al. 2003. Effect of a
practice-based strategy on test ordering performance
of primary care physicians: a randomized trial.
Janssens PM, Wasser G. 2013. Managing laboratory test
ordering through test frequency filtering.