Skip to main content

Table 3 Screening and preventive care (Mammography /PAP smear/ Influenza vaccination/Bone mineral density/Colorectal cancer screening) - Table of administrative data vs chart abstraction vs patient survey

From: Assessing methods for measurement of clinical outcomes and quality of care in primary care practices

Chart Abstraction   Administrative Data   Patient Survey  
Colorectal Screening*   Yes No Total Kappa (95% CI) Yes No Total Kappa (95% CI)
Yes 175 127 302 .442 (.372, .511) 138 105 243 .046 (-.052, .144)
50+ yrs No 26 202 228 % agreement 87 80 167 % agreement
  Total 201 329 530 =71% 225 185 410 =53%
Bone Mineral   Yes No Total Kappa (95% CI) Yes No Total Kappa (95% CI)
Density ≤5 yrs Yes 123 6 129 .852 (.789, .916) 86 15 101 .667 (.549, .785)
65+ yrs** No 13 115 128 % agreement 18 65 83 % agreement
  Total 136 121 257 =93% 104 80 184 =82%
Flu Shot ≤ 2 yrs*   Yes No Total Kappa (95% CI) Yes No Total Kappa (95% CI)
65+ yrs Yes 83 102 185 .253 (.168, .338) 133 15 148 .209 (.056, .353)
  No 9 71 80 % agreement 40 16 56 % agreement
  Total 92 173 265 =58% 173 31 204 =73%
PAP ≤ 2 yrs*   Yes No Total Kappa (95% CI) Yes No Total Kappa (95% CI)
Females Yes 255 100 355 .351 (.265, .437) 270 12 282 .232 (.092, .372)
18-69 yrs No 14 57 71 % agreement 42 12 54 % agreement
  Total 269 157 426 =73% 312 24 336 =84%
Clinical Breast Exam ≤ 2 yrs*   Yes No Total Kappa (95% CI) Yes No Total Kappa (95% CI)
      118 16 134 .094 (-.09, .278)
Females    *Not in Billing* 19 5 24 % agreement
50-69 yrs       137 21 158 =78%
Mammogram*
≤ 2 yrs
  Yes No Total Kappa (95% CI) Yes No Total Kappa (95% CI)
Yes 146 20 166 .407 (.241, .573) 135 4 139 .190 (-.012, .392)
Females No 13 17 30 % agreement 20 4 24 % agreement
50-69 yrs Total 159 37 196 =83% 155 8 163 =85%
  1. *Comparing survey “ever” done to CA search back in chart for 2 yrs.
  2. **Comparing survey “ever “done to CA search back in chart for 5 yrs.
  3. Note that the total number of subjects for each item varies based on eligibility for the manoeuvre as well as completeness of the data set. Chart abstraction data had very few missing values as for most items missing was coded as “No”. However, in the patient survey some individual questions or sections of the survey were skipped resulting in a reduced subsample for the comparison in a given question.