The present invention relates generally to the field of data processing and report generation, and more specifically to the field of automatically generated clinical report summaries created when, for example, a physician performs patient care duties at a medical care facility.
One typical consequence of a patient undergoing either an examination or receiving treatment, e.g. in a hospital environment, is the creation of a report of findings authored by the diagnosing physician. The findings are textual descriptions of the diagnosis, examination results and/or treatment protocol. A summary list of findings, often in the form of an outline or a bulleted list, is typically included as a part of this report. The summary restates findings that appear in the body of the report, thereby permitting a subsequent reader of the report to determine the most relevant information by reading the summary listing. Commonly, physicians want items in the summary findings section ordered or ranked according to their severity. Some items may rank so low that the physician does not want them included in the report summary. In any particular case the physician may wish to comment on some of the summary findings regardless of their severity, and/or include other summary findings if those findings are sufficiently serious.
In addition, physicians often perform examinations and order tests to confirm or disprove a preliminary diagnosis. A physician may want findings in a summary report selected and ordered to emphasize the relationship between the summary report and the preliminary diagnosis. For example, if the examination and tests do not find any evidence to support the preliminary diagnosis, then the summary report should be ordered to highlight that fact.
Modern healthcare facilities utilize computer based data storage and processing equipment. This equipment includes medical reporting software packages which facilitate the creation of such reports by the physician or other user. One feature of such report generating programs is the capability for the physician to generate the list of summary findings.
Some existing report generation programs automatically generate the summary findings from a combination of the measurement values, text or other data entered in the body or the report. Typically, the automatic generation of the report summary involves relying on a predetermination that certain items in the main body of the report are assigned a given relevance or importance. Such items are automatically copied from the body of the report into the summary findings section.
However, even when utilizing an automatically generated summary list program, the diagnosing physician reviews and often add, remove, and/or edit the findings automatically inserted into the list. Further, for any given patient undergoing examination or treatment, the diagnosing physician may wish to include in the summary report some items appearing in the body of the report but not automatically selected for inclusion in the summary. The physician may also wish to delete items automatically appearing in the summary findings, and he or she may wish to reorder the entries in summary findings report.
A need therefore exists for a report generation program that improves the quality of an automatically generated clinical report by utilizing appropriate problem solving techniques to determine which findings are to be included in the medical report summary. A further need exists to permit the sorting and ranking of the summary findings by means of a user definable algorithm.
In accordance with principles of the present invention, a method of automatically generating a medical report summary includes the following steps. A medical report is generated to include one or more parameters. A weight is calculated for the parameters in the medical report. The parameters are ordered based upon the calculated weight. A medical report summary is created that lists the parameters that have been ordered based upon the calculated weight.
An executable application, as used herein, comprises code (i.e. machine readable instructions) for implementing predetermined functions, for example those of: an operating system, a healthcare information system, or other system for processing data, either stored in the computer system or entered by a user, in response to user command or input. An executable procedure is a segment of code, a subroutine, or other distinct section or portion of code of an executable application for performing one or more particular processes, such as receiving input parameters or user command data, performing operations on the received input parameters and/or in response to the user command data, and/or providing resulting output parameters.
A processor, as used herein, is a device for performing tasks as specified by an executable application or other set of machine-readable instructions. A processor operates by executing the instructions contained in the executable application. The processor may be controlled in this manner to receive information from an external information device, to manipulate, analyze, modify, convert the received information, and/or to transmit information to an external information device. As used herein, a processor may comprise hardware, firmware, and/or software. For example, a processor may use or comprise the capabilities of a controller or microprocessor. A display processor or generator is a known element of a processor comprising electronic circuitry or software, or a combination of both, for generating signals representing display images or portions thereof. These image representative signals are supplied to a display device which displays the image represented by the signals. A user interface comprises one or more display images enabling user interaction with a processor or other device.
In operation, the plurality 404, 406 of workstations may interact with resources of their own, of other workstations 404, 406, and/or of the server computer 408 via communications over the network 402. More specifically, the plurality 404, 406 of workstations, may interact with the server computer 408. The server computer 408, in turn, retrieves executable applications and/or data from the mass storage device 410 and forwards the executable applications and/or data to the requesting workstation 404, 406. The workstation 404, 406 executes the executable application to process the data under the control of the user of the workstation. The executable application may generate data which may be sent back to the server computer 408 to be stored in the mass storage device 410 via the network 402.
For example, the mass storage device 410 may have stored in it a report maintenance executable application 412. The report maintenance executable application 412, when transferred to and executed on one of the workstations, e.g. 406, under control of a user, may generate report data specifying how a medical report is to be processed to automatically generate a summary report. This report data may be sent back to the server computer 408 from the workstation 406. The server computer 408 stores the report data 414 on the mass storage device 410. The mass storage device may also have stored in it a report generating executable application 416. The report generating executable application 416, and the report data 414, when transferred to and executed on one of the workstations, e.g. 404, under control of a diagnosing physician, may be used to generate and/or process a medical report to automatically generate a summary report to be associated with the medical report.
In
A medical report includes, among other things, two parameters: observations and findings. As used herein, the term ‘observation’ means a physiological feature of a patient determined by one or more examinations of and/or tests performed on the patient. For example, the shape of the left ventricle of the patient is an observation. The term ‘finding’ means the result of the examinations and/or tests. Each observation may result in one of a plurality of possible findings. Continuing the example, the findings of the observation of the left ventricle shape may be: “normal”, “mildly dilated”, “moderately dilated” or “severely dilated”. The findings may also be a numerical. For example, the observation of the patient's SpO2 level results in a finding expressed as a number, in this case a percentage.
Typically, an administrating physician or department chair initially configures the automatic report summary creation features, described in more detail below, by executing the report maintenance executable application 412 (
In
The administrating physician or user is able to configure the manner in which the report summary 105 is automatically created by selecting the “Configure” tab 159 on the right-hand side of the graphical user interface 100. Referring to
The administrating physician associates, at step 308, a set of one or more findings 210 (
Alternatively, summary phrases may be assigned to the possible findings, and may include further information which may be deemed important to a person reviewing the medical report and the summary report. For example, instead of, or in addition to, a summary phrase “L. Vent Shape” 217 assigned to the observation 212, a summary phrase may be assigned to each finding associated with that observation 212. For example, a summary phrase assigned to the finding “Normal” 223 may be “The left ventricle is normal”; the summary phrase assigned to the finding “Mildly Dilated” 224 may be “The left ventricle is mildly dilated”; the summary phrase assigned to the finding “Moderately Dilated” 225 may be “The left ventricle is moderately dilated and should be rechecked in one year”; and the summary phrase assigned to the finding “Severely Dilated 226 may be “The left ventricle is severely dilated and surgery is recommended.” These phrases may be substituted for the raw findings 223, 224, 225 and 226 in the medical summary report.
During creation of a medical report, described in more detail below, selecting an observation and choosing one of its findings results in selection of the associated summary observation phrase and calculation of its weight from the values assigned to the observation and finding. The weight may be calculated algorithmically by combining the value assigned to the observation and the value assigned to the associated finding in order to create a composite weight. For example, the weight associated with an observation may be multiplied by the weight associated with a finding to calculate the composite weight associated with that finding. The resulting weight may be scaled to be within a predetermined range. Alternatively, some other function of the observation value and finding value may be used, such as a weighted average, a summation or weighting an observation value differently than a finding value. It is also possible to use just the observation value or just the finding value in calculating the weight. It is further possible to calculate the weight for a finding based on values assigned to more than one selected observation and finding. The administrating physician may specify such algorithms.
The calculated composite weight is utilized by subsequent inclusion and sorting algorithms, described below. For example, a convention may be adopted of assigning lower values or weights to less important (i.e. less severe) observations/findings and higher values or weights to more important (i.e. more severe) observations/findings. Observations and findings with higher values or weights may be listed before those of lower values or weights in the summary report, thus ensuring that more important observations and findings are listed first, followed by less important observations and findings. One skilled in the art will understand, however, that this is an arbitrary convention, and any other such convention which leads to appropriate selection and sorting may be used.
Values 228, related to the severity, are assigned to the observations 203 and values 230, related to the severity, are assigned to the findings 210 at step 327. Observations of more important physiological parameters receive a higher value than observations of less important physiological parameters. Similarly, with respect to the value of a finding, more serious findings receive a higher value than less serious findings. That is, the “Normal” finding 23 might be assigned a value of 0 (zero), the “Mildly Dilated” finding 24 may be assigned a value of 2 (two), the “Moderately Dilated” finding 25 is assigned the value of 6 (six), while the “Severely Dilated” finding 26 might be assigned a value of 10 (ten).
After the observations 203, summary phrases 209, findings 210 and values 228, 230 have been specified, as described above, the administrating physician may also define or select an inclusion algorithm at step 336 (
An inclusion algorithm selection box 138, illustrated in more detail in
An averaging inclusion algorithm, selected by activating a button 137, is another menu selection appearing on user interface 100. When the averaging algorithm is selected, the weights of the findings are averaged and findings having weights equal to or greater than the average weight are included in the report summary 105.
Activating a button 141 selects a percentile inclusion algorithm in which an upper portion of findings may be chosen in accordance a selection made from the accompanying percentile menu 142. For example, a selection of 90% in the percentile menu 142 results in setting a threshold value at the 90th percentile, that is at a point where 90% of the findings have weights less than the threshold value and 10% of the findings have weights greater than the threshold value. The 10% of the findings greater than the threshold value are selected to be included in the report summary 105. Other selections from the percentile menu 142 result in setting the threshold value at the 80th, 70th, or 60th percentile. Activating a button 143 implements an inclusion algorithm which selects findings having a nonzero weight. Regardless of the inclusion algorithm chosen, whenever the calculated weight of the finding 210 (
At step 344 the administrating physician selects a sorting algorithm. The sorting algorithm orders the included findings 110 (
The customization of the automatic generation of a report summary 105, as described by steps 306, 307, 308, 327, 336 and 344, is typically performed by an administrating physician when the report maintenance executable application 412 (
Referring again to
Referring to
In either case, respective weights, optionally comprising composite weights, are calculated for the findings 110 (
While the report summary section 105 of a report may be configured to include summary findings that exceed a specified weight, it may also be configured to include summary findings having a specific weight or a weight below a certain threshold value. Similarly, sorting of the findings may be based on the weights of the observations 103 rather than the weights of the findings 110 alone. Other similar changes to the weighting, selection and sorting algorithms may be made.
The present application claims priority that is derived from provisional patent application Ser. No. 60/497,161, which was filed on Aug. 22, 2003.
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
60497161 | Aug 2003 | US |