Abstract
AIM: The potential for recall bias at initial intake visit of multiparous obstetrical patients is a common concern. Accuracy of initial obstetrical history reporting can drastically alter the course of pregnancy management if the information documented during the current gestation is inaccurate. This retrospective study assesses the overall accuracy of obstetrical history reporting at intake visit for multiparous obstetrical patients.
METHODS: Delivery record data from our urban-centered academic teaching institution was collected from January 2016-February 2018. Research collection included specific patient-reported obstetrical history. Delivery records were screened by all authors and EMR delivery record data was compared with the initial obstetrical history comparison of accuracy.
RESULTS: 321 delivery records were retained for final analysis. Of these, 318 (99%) recorded accurate type of delivery, 301 (94%) accurately recorded year of delivery, 292 (91%) accurately recorded gravida and para history, 208 (65%) reported accurate gestational age at delivery, and 186 (58%) accurately recorded birth weight.
CONCLUSION: Results suggest our patient population was accurate at recording routine obstetrical information on initial prenatal visit. However, poor accuracy was noted in reporting of detailed obstetrical information with potential for significant impacts on management of future pregnancies. Results obtained from this study can create measures to improve patient's obstetrical history reporting.
METHODS: Delivery record data from our urban-centered academic teaching institution was collected from January 2016-February 2018. Research collection included specific patient-reported obstetrical history. Delivery records were screened by all authors and EMR delivery record data was compared with the initial obstetrical history comparison of accuracy.
RESULTS: 321 delivery records were retained for final analysis. Of these, 318 (99%) recorded accurate type of delivery, 301 (94%) accurately recorded year of delivery, 292 (91%) accurately recorded gravida and para history, 208 (65%) reported accurate gestational age at delivery, and 186 (58%) accurately recorded birth weight.
CONCLUSION: Results suggest our patient population was accurate at recording routine obstetrical information on initial prenatal visit. However, poor accuracy was noted in reporting of detailed obstetrical information with potential for significant impacts on management of future pregnancies. Results obtained from this study can create measures to improve patient's obstetrical history reporting.
| Original language | American English |
|---|---|
| Journal | Oklahoma State Medical Proceedings |
| Volume | 4 |
| Issue number | 1 |
| State | Published - 17 Jul 2020 |