Navigating data availability challenges in healthcare: assessing the added value of pulmonary function testing to the Care Assessment Need score for mortality risk.

Authors

Khalid A Ishani, Anders Westanmo, Amy Gravely, Meredith C McCormack, Arianne K Baldomero

Published in

BMJ health & care informatics. Volume 32. Issue 1. Jul 20, 2025. Epub Jul 20, 2025.

Abstract

Pulmonary function testing (PFT) data, such as forced expiratory volume (FEV₁) has become increasingly siloed from the electronic health record (EHR). We hypothesised that FEV₁ %pred is independently associated with mortality risk, even after adjusting for the Care Assessment Needs (CAN) score, a validated method developed by the Veterans Health Administration (VA) to predict mortality. Additionally, we hypothesised that the integration of PFT data into the EHR has declined in recent years.
We conducted a retrospective cohort study using national VA data on PFTs from 2013 to 2018. Using logistic regression adjusted for CAN scores, we assessed the associations between FEV1 percent predicted (%pred) and all-cause mortality at 1 year and 5 years.
While the number of PFTs performed has generally increased since 2000, the integration of PFT data into the EHR has declined since 2006. The CAN-adjusted odds of 1-year mortality were 2.94 (95% CI: 2.66 to 3.24) for those with FEV₁ %pred <35%, compared with those with FEV₁ %pred ≥70%, while 5-year mortality odds were 3.83 (95% CI: 3.58 to 4.09).
Our study shows that FEV₁ %pred is statistically significantly associated with increased risk of mortality, above and beyond the CAN score. However, the declining integration of PFT data into the VA EHR highlights a concerning trend of isolating critical test results from clinical care.
Among people with FEV₁ recorded in the EHR, FEV₁ %pred is statistically significantly associated with increased risk of both 1-year and 5-year mortality, above and beyond the CAN score.

PMID:
40685162
Bibliographic data and abstract were imported from PubMed on 21 Jul 2025.

Read full publication at:
Please sign in to see all details.

Stats

1-terrible, 9-excellent. How would you rate this publication? Sign in in to submit your rating.

Post a comment

You need to be signed in to post comments. You can sign in here.

Comments

There are no comments yet.