To evaluate an admission review tool - The reliability and validity of AEP

Hsyien Chia Wen, Kuo Piao Chung, Ya Seng Hsueh, Chih Liang Yaung, Wei Chu Chie

研究成果: 雜誌貢獻文章

摘要

Objectives: The purposes of our study are to evaluate the reliability, validity and practicality of mAEP (modified Appropriateness Evaluation Protocol) in Taiwan, and try to find the major reasons for inappropriate admission. Methods: We collected 462 appeal claim medical records from Taipei and the Northern branch of the Bureau of National Health Insurance (BNHI). The copies of the medical records were dispensed by a single blind technique to 4 reviewers who used mAEP to judge the appropriateness of admission. Then the result was compared to the BNHI medical review physicians' judgement. The data was analyzed by SPSS 10.0 statistics software. Results: Three of the four reviewers' original Cohen's kappa were around 0.4. However, after reviewers discussion and revision of their appropriateness judgements. The kappa increased between 0.486 to 0.661. This represents a good reproducibility of mAEP. With regard to the sensitivity and specificity, the branch of BNHI medical review physicians and some of our reviewers were around 70%. Therefore, mAEP's validity still has room for improvement. The major reason for inappropriate admission is that the "diagnostic procedures and/or treatment could be done on an outpatient basis". This is the same as the studies in Western countires. The mean time to review the medical records with mAEP was 2.6 minutes. This is similar to Western studies and suggests that mAEP is a fast, easy and timesaving utilization review instrument. Conclusion: The preliminary result proved that the reliability, validity and practicality of mAEP are all good. However, if mAEP could become a tool for the BNHI's medical review and hospitals' admission protocol, further studies are needed.

原文英語
頁(從 - 到)291-300
頁數10
期刊Taiwan Journal of Public Health
20
發行號4
出版狀態已發佈 - 2001
對外發佈Yes

指紋

Reproducibility of Results
National Health Programs
Medical Records
Utilization Review
Physicians
Taiwan
Outpatients
Software
Sensitivity and Specificity

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health

引用此文

Wen, H. C., Chung, K. P., Hsueh, Y. S., Yaung, C. L., & Chie, W. C. (2001). To evaluate an admission review tool - The reliability and validity of AEP. Taiwan Journal of Public Health, 20(4), 291-300.

To evaluate an admission review tool - The reliability and validity of AEP. / Wen, Hsyien Chia; Chung, Kuo Piao; Hsueh, Ya Seng; Yaung, Chih Liang; Chie, Wei Chu.

於: Taiwan Journal of Public Health, 卷 20, 編號 4, 2001, p. 291-300.

研究成果: 雜誌貢獻文章

Wen, HC, Chung, KP, Hsueh, YS, Yaung, CL & Chie, WC 2001, 'To evaluate an admission review tool - The reliability and validity of AEP', Taiwan Journal of Public Health, 卷 20, 編號 4, 頁 291-300.
Wen, Hsyien Chia ; Chung, Kuo Piao ; Hsueh, Ya Seng ; Yaung, Chih Liang ; Chie, Wei Chu. / To evaluate an admission review tool - The reliability and validity of AEP. 於: Taiwan Journal of Public Health. 2001 ; 卷 20, 編號 4. 頁 291-300.
@article{4373d90e5ccd424e9f96b875c5b2af2f,
title = "To evaluate an admission review tool - The reliability and validity of AEP",
abstract = "Objectives: The purposes of our study are to evaluate the reliability, validity and practicality of mAEP (modified Appropriateness Evaluation Protocol) in Taiwan, and try to find the major reasons for inappropriate admission. Methods: We collected 462 appeal claim medical records from Taipei and the Northern branch of the Bureau of National Health Insurance (BNHI). The copies of the medical records were dispensed by a single blind technique to 4 reviewers who used mAEP to judge the appropriateness of admission. Then the result was compared to the BNHI medical review physicians' judgement. The data was analyzed by SPSS 10.0 statistics software. Results: Three of the four reviewers' original Cohen's kappa were around 0.4. However, after reviewers discussion and revision of their appropriateness judgements. The kappa increased between 0.486 to 0.661. This represents a good reproducibility of mAEP. With regard to the sensitivity and specificity, the branch of BNHI medical review physicians and some of our reviewers were around 70{\%}. Therefore, mAEP's validity still has room for improvement. The major reason for inappropriate admission is that the {"}diagnostic procedures and/or treatment could be done on an outpatient basis{"}. This is the same as the studies in Western countires. The mean time to review the medical records with mAEP was 2.6 minutes. This is similar to Western studies and suggests that mAEP is a fast, easy and timesaving utilization review instrument. Conclusion: The preliminary result proved that the reliability, validity and practicality of mAEP are all good. However, if mAEP could become a tool for the BNHI's medical review and hospitals' admission protocol, further studies are needed.",
keywords = "Modified Appropriateness Evaluation Protocol, Practicality, Reliability, Validity",
author = "Wen, {Hsyien Chia} and Chung, {Kuo Piao} and Hsueh, {Ya Seng} and Yaung, {Chih Liang} and Chie, {Wei Chu}",
year = "2001",
language = "English",
volume = "20",
pages = "291--300",
journal = "台灣公共衛生雜誌",
issn = "1023-2141",
publisher = "臺灣公共衛生學會",
number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - To evaluate an admission review tool - The reliability and validity of AEP

AU - Wen, Hsyien Chia

AU - Chung, Kuo Piao

AU - Hsueh, Ya Seng

AU - Yaung, Chih Liang

AU - Chie, Wei Chu

PY - 2001

Y1 - 2001

N2 - Objectives: The purposes of our study are to evaluate the reliability, validity and practicality of mAEP (modified Appropriateness Evaluation Protocol) in Taiwan, and try to find the major reasons for inappropriate admission. Methods: We collected 462 appeal claim medical records from Taipei and the Northern branch of the Bureau of National Health Insurance (BNHI). The copies of the medical records were dispensed by a single blind technique to 4 reviewers who used mAEP to judge the appropriateness of admission. Then the result was compared to the BNHI medical review physicians' judgement. The data was analyzed by SPSS 10.0 statistics software. Results: Three of the four reviewers' original Cohen's kappa were around 0.4. However, after reviewers discussion and revision of their appropriateness judgements. The kappa increased between 0.486 to 0.661. This represents a good reproducibility of mAEP. With regard to the sensitivity and specificity, the branch of BNHI medical review physicians and some of our reviewers were around 70%. Therefore, mAEP's validity still has room for improvement. The major reason for inappropriate admission is that the "diagnostic procedures and/or treatment could be done on an outpatient basis". This is the same as the studies in Western countires. The mean time to review the medical records with mAEP was 2.6 minutes. This is similar to Western studies and suggests that mAEP is a fast, easy and timesaving utilization review instrument. Conclusion: The preliminary result proved that the reliability, validity and practicality of mAEP are all good. However, if mAEP could become a tool for the BNHI's medical review and hospitals' admission protocol, further studies are needed.

AB - Objectives: The purposes of our study are to evaluate the reliability, validity and practicality of mAEP (modified Appropriateness Evaluation Protocol) in Taiwan, and try to find the major reasons for inappropriate admission. Methods: We collected 462 appeal claim medical records from Taipei and the Northern branch of the Bureau of National Health Insurance (BNHI). The copies of the medical records were dispensed by a single blind technique to 4 reviewers who used mAEP to judge the appropriateness of admission. Then the result was compared to the BNHI medical review physicians' judgement. The data was analyzed by SPSS 10.0 statistics software. Results: Three of the four reviewers' original Cohen's kappa were around 0.4. However, after reviewers discussion and revision of their appropriateness judgements. The kappa increased between 0.486 to 0.661. This represents a good reproducibility of mAEP. With regard to the sensitivity and specificity, the branch of BNHI medical review physicians and some of our reviewers were around 70%. Therefore, mAEP's validity still has room for improvement. The major reason for inappropriate admission is that the "diagnostic procedures and/or treatment could be done on an outpatient basis". This is the same as the studies in Western countires. The mean time to review the medical records with mAEP was 2.6 minutes. This is similar to Western studies and suggests that mAEP is a fast, easy and timesaving utilization review instrument. Conclusion: The preliminary result proved that the reliability, validity and practicality of mAEP are all good. However, if mAEP could become a tool for the BNHI's medical review and hospitals' admission protocol, further studies are needed.

KW - Modified Appropriateness Evaluation Protocol

KW - Practicality

KW - Reliability

KW - Validity

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0035571826&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0035571826&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:0035571826

VL - 20

SP - 291

EP - 300

JO - 台灣公共衛生雜誌

JF - 台灣公共衛生雜誌

SN - 1023-2141

IS - 4

ER -