Concordance of chart and billing data with direct observation in dental practice

Community Dentistry and Oral Epidemiology

Volumn 36, Issue 5, 2008, Pages 466-474

  Demko, Catherine A ^a,b   Victoroff, Kristin Zakariasen ^b   Wotman, Stephen ^b  

^a Case Western Reserve School of Dental Medicine ^*  (United States)

^b CASE WESTERN RESERVE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Concordance; Dental charts; Direct observation; Validity

Indexed keywords

ACCOUNTING; ARTICLE; CLINICAL PRACTICE; COMPARATIVE STUDY; HUMAN; INFORMATION PROCESSING; MEDICAL RECORD; METHODOLOGY; OBSERVATION; OBSERVER VARIATION; SELF DISCLOSURE; TASK PERFORMANCE; VALIDATION STUDY;

DATA COLLECTION; DENTAL RECORDS; DENTIST'S PRACTICE PATTERNS; HUMANS; OBSERVATION; OBSERVER VARIATION; PATIENT CREDIT AND COLLECTION; SELF DISCLOSURE; TIME AND MOTION STUDIES;

EID: 52449085229     PISSN: 03015661     EISSN: 16000528     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-0528.2007.00415.x     Document Type: Article

References (30)

1. American Dental Association SC. The 2001 survey of dental practice: income from the private practice of dentistry. American Dental Association, Chicago, IL 2002.
2. Solomon E, Murray J, Dodge W, Redding S, Valenza J, Flaitz C et al. Scope of practice comparison: a tool for curriculum decision making. J Dent Educ 2006 70 : 231 45.
3. Manning W, Bailit H, Benjamin B, Newhouse J. The demand for dental care: evidence from a randomized trial in health insurance. J Am Dent Assoc 1985 110 : 895 902.
4. Bailit H. Health services research. Adv Dent Res 2003 17 : 82 5.
5. Parker W, Williams D, Mayotte R, James J, Mangelsdorff A. A model for dental workload measurement. Am J Public Health 1982 72 : 1022 7.
6. Wan T, Vanostenberg P, Salley J, Singley D, West J. A cost and production analysis of hospital dental care programs. Public Health Rep 1987 102 : 512 22.
7. Kronstrom M, Palmqvist S, Soderfeldt B, Eriksson T, Carlsson G. Congruence between self-reported and actually provided prosthodontic services among Swedish dentists. Acta Odontol Scand 1999 57 : 9 15.
8. Conroy M, Majchrzak N, Silverman C, Chang Y, Regan S, Schneider L et al. Measuring provider adherence to tobacco treatment guidelines: a comparison of electronic medical record review, patient survey, and provider survey. Nicotine Tob Res 2005 7 (Suppl. 1 S35 43.
9. Callahan E, Bertakis K. Development and validation of the Davis Observation Code. Fam Med 1991 23 : 19 24.
10. Gilbert G, Rose J, Shelton B. A prospective study of the validity of self-reported use of specific types of dental services. Public Health Rep 2003 118 : 18 26.
11. Swedberg Y, Malmqvist J, Johnsson T. A method for dental care activities time study using observer monitored counting of frequencies. Swed Dent J 1993 17 : 155 63.
12. Stange K, Zyzanski S, Smith T, Kelly R, Langa D, Flocke S et al. How valid are medical records and patient questionnaires for physician profiling and health services research? A comparison with direct observation of patients visits Med Care 1998 36 : 851 67.
13. McDermott M, Lenhardt R, Catrambone C, Walter J, Weiss K. Adequacy of medical chart review to characterize emergency care for asthma: findings from the Illinois Emergency Department Asthma Collaborative. Acad Emerg Med 2006 13 : 345 8.
14. Bryant M, Essomba R. Measuring time utilization in rural health centres. Health Policy Plan 1995 10 : 415 22.
15. Hermida J, Nicholas D, Blumenfeld S. Comparative validity of three methods for assessment of the quality of primary health care. Int J Qual Health Care 1999 11 : 429 33.
16. Wotman S, Lalumandier J, Nelson S, Stange K. Implications for dental education of a dental school-initiated practice research network. J Dent Educ 2001 65 : 751 9.
17. US Census Bureau. Summary file 3 (SF 3). Available at: http://factfinder.census.gov/servlet/DTGeoSearchByListServlet?ds_name= DEC_2000_SF3_U&_lang=en&_ts=204408197025 (3 August 2007); generated by Joy Wiedemann; using American Factfinder.
18. Sudano JJ Jr., Kofford B, Wotman S. Using tablet PC's in dental practice research: technology, cost savings, and direct data entry "on the go". J Public Health Dent 2005 65 : 244 5.
19. Parker W, Schopper A, Mangelsdorff A, Cheatham J. Dental treatment time requirements of military personnel. Mil Med 1979 144 : 376 80.
20. STATA Corporation. stata, release 8. College Station, TX : STATA Corporation 2003.
21. nd edn. New York : Academic Press 1988.
22. Landis J, Koch G. The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics 1977 33 : 159 74.
23. SPSS Inc. spss version 13.0, Chicago, IL : SPSS Inc. 2004.
24. US Census Bureau. Available at: http://www.census.gov/popest/national/ asrh/NC-EST2005/NC-EST2005-02.xls (3 August 2007); generated by C. Demko; using American Factfinder.
25. Wotman S, Adelson R, Douglass C. Disaggregation of oral health care. A model for defining public and private responsibility. J Am Coll Dent 1993 60 : 24 9.
26. Ransohoff D, Feinstein A. Problems of spectrum and bias in evaluating the efficacy of diagnostic tests. N Engl J Med 1978 299 : 926 30.
27. Green L. The weekly return as a practical instrument for data collection in office based research. Fam Med 1988 20 : 182 4.
28. Demko CA, Victoroff KZ, Sudano J, Lalumandier J, Williams K, Abbe M et al. Direct observation of prevention counseling and procedures in dental offices. J Dent Res 2006 85(Special Issue A) : 0803.
29. Goodwin M. Using direct observation in primary care research - the Hawthorne effect: defining the nature and impact of the presence of research observers on patients and physicians in community family practice. Dissertation, Cleveland, OH : Western Reserve University, 2002.
30. Oral Health in America. A report of the surgeon general 2000. Available at: http://www2.nidcr.nih.gov/sgr/sgrohweb/welcome.htm (3 August 2007).