Skip to main content
NCBI home page
Proceedings of the Annual Symposium on Computer Application in Medical Care logoLink to Proceedings of the Annual Symposium on Computer Application in Medical Care
. 1995:728–732.

Factors impacting the success of computerized preadmission screening.

J W Hales 1, R M Gardner 1, J T Jacobson 1
PMCID: PMC2579189  PMID: 8563385

Abstract

Many approaches to controlling costs under managed care rely on the ability to prospectively identify the type or level of service a patient requires at the time of presentation. Although computers may effectively predict these factors, the impact of such a computer system is greatly dependent on its integration into the admission process. Three factors that influence the effectiveness of predictive screening using a computer were identified. They are detection, intervention and compliance. The effect of these factors was then measured in a prospective randomized trial evaluating the effectiveness of computerized preadmission screening for predicting the appropriateness of inpatient care. This paper examines the three factors and their impact on the effectiveness of the system. A mathematical model that relates the factors to the overall effectiveness of computerized preadmission screening is proposed and considered in a more general context.

Full text

PDF
728

Selected References

These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.

  1. Angell M. Cost containment and the physician. JAMA. 1985 Sep 6;254(9):1203–1207. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Davies N. E., Felder L. H. Applying brakes to the runaway American health care system. A proposed agenda. JAMA. 1990 Jan 5;263(1):73–76. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Gertman P. M., Restuccia J. D. The appropriateness evaluation protocol: a technique for assessing unnecessary days of hospital care. Med Care. 1981 Aug;19(8):855–871. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Greene H. L., Goldberg R. J., Beattie H., Russo A. R., Ellison R. C., Dalen J. E. Physician attitudes toward cost containment. The missing piece of the puzzle. Arch Intern Med. 1989 Sep;149(9):1966–1968. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Imperiale T. F., Siegal A. P., Crede W. B., Kamens E. A. Preadmission screening of Medicare patients. The clinical impact of reimbursement disapproval. JAMA. 1988 Jun 17;259(23):3418–3421. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Payne S. M. Identifying and managing inappropriate hospital utilization: a policy synthesis. Health Serv Res. 1987 Dec;22(5):709–769. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Pryor T. A., Gardner R. M., Clayton P. D., Warner H. R. The HELP system. J Med Syst. 1983 Apr;7(2):87–102. doi: 10.1007/BF00995116. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Shahoda T. Preadmission review cuts hospital use. Hospitals. 1984 Aug 1;58(15):54–55. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Siu A. L., Sonnenberg F. A., Manning W. G., Goldberg G. A., Bloomfield E. S., Newhouse J. P., Brook R. H. Inappropriate use of hospitals in a randomized trial of health insurance plans. N Engl J Med. 1986 Nov 13;315(20):1259–1266. doi: 10.1056/NEJM198611133152005. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Strumwasser I., Paranjpe N. V., Ronis D. L., Share D., Sell L. J. Reliability and validity of utilization review criteria. Appropriateness Evaluation Protocol, Standardized Medreview Instrument, and Intensity-Severity-Discharge criteria. Med Care. 1990 Feb;28(2):95–111. doi: 10.1097/00005650-199002000-00001. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Wilson L. D. An example of hospital utilization review. West J Med. 1989 Jun;150(6):718–722. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Proceedings of the Annual Symposium on Computer Application in Medical Care are provided here courtesy of American Medical Informatics Association

RESOURCES