Missing patients in “Major Trauma Registry” of Navarre: incidence and pattern

Missing patient registrations in the Dutch National Trauma Registry of Southwest Netherlands: Prevalence and epidemiology

INTRODUCTION

Health care patient records have been digitalised the past twenty years, and registries have been automated. Missing registrations are common, and can result in selection bias.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the prevalence and characteristics of missed registrations in a Dutch regional trauma registry.

METHODS

An automatically generated trauma registry export was done for ten out of eleven hospitals in trauma region Southwest Netherlands, between June 1 and August 31, 2020. Second, lists were checked for being falsely flagged as 'non-trauma'. Finally, a list was generated with trauma tick box flagged as 'trauma' but were not automatically in the export due to administrative errors. Automated and missed registration datasets were compared on patient characteristics and logistic regression models were run with random intercepts and missed registration as outcome variable on the complete dataset.

RESULTS

A total of 2,230 automated registrations and 175 (7.3 %) missed registrations were included for the Dutch National Trauma Registry, ranging from 1 to 14 % between participating hospitals. Patients of the missed registration dataset had characteristics of a higher level of care, compared with patients of automated registrations. Level of trauma care (level II OR 0.464 95 % CI 0.328-0.666, p < 0.001; level III OR 0.179 95 % CI 0.092-0.325, p < 0.001), major trauma (OR 2.928 95 % CI 1.792-4.65, p < 0.001), ICU admission (OR 2.337 95 % CI 1.792-4.650, p < 0.001), and surgery (OR 1.871 95 % CI 1.371-2.570, p < 0.001) were potential predictors for missed registrations in multivariate logistic regression analysis.

CONCLUSION

Missed registrations occur frequently and the rate of missed registrations differs greatly between hospitals. Automated and missed registration datasets display differences related to patients requiring more intensive care, which held for the major trauma subset. Checking for missed registrations is time consuming, automated registration lists need a human touch for validation and to be complete.

Incidence and case ascertainment of treated in-hospital cardiac arrest events in a national quality registry - A comparison of reported and non-reported events

BACKGROUND

Approximately 2500 in-hospital cardiac arrest (IHCA) events are reported annually to the Swedish Registry of Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation (SRCR) with an estimated incidence of 1.7/1000 hospital admissions. The aim of this study was to evaluate the compliance in reporting IHCA events to the SRCR and to compare reported IHCA events with possible non-reported events, and to estimate IHCA incidence.

METHODS

Fifteen diagnose codes, eight Classification of Care Measure codes, and two perioperative complication codes were used to find all treated IHCAs in 2018-2019 at six hospitals of varying sizes and resources. All identified IHCA events were cross-checked against the SRCR using personal identity numbers. All non-reported IHCA events were retrospectively reported and compared with the prospectively reported events.

RESULTS

A total of 3638 hospital medical records were reviewed and 1109 IHCA events in 999 patients were identified, with 254 of the events not found in the SRCR. The case completeness was 77% (range 55-94%). IHCA incidence was 2.9/1000 hospital admissions and 12.4/1000 admissions to intensive care units. The retrospectively reported events were more often found on monitored wards, involved patients who were younger, had less comorbidity, were often found in shockable rhythm and more often achieved sustained spontaneous circulation, compared with in prospectively reported events.

CONCLUSION

IHCA case completeness in the SRCR was 77% and IHCA incidence was 2.9/1000 hospital admissions. The retrospectively reported IHCA events were found in monitored areas where the rapid response team was not alerted, which might have affected regular reporting procedures.

Validation of the Swedish Trauma Registry (SweTrau)

PURPOSE

Validation of registries is important to ensure accuracy of data and registry-based research. This is often done by comparisons of the original registry data with other sources, e.g. another registry or a re-registration of data. Founded in 2011, the Swedish Trauma Registry (SweTrau) consists of variables based on international consensus (the Utstein Template of Trauma). This project aimed to perform the first validation of SweTrau.

METHODS

On-site re-registration was performed on randomly selected trauma patients and compared to the registration in SweTrau. Accuracy (exact agreement), correctness (exact agreement plus data within acceptable range), comparability (similarity with other registries), data completeness (1-missing data) and case completeness (1-missing cases) were deemed as either good ([Formula: see text] 85%), adequate (70-84%) or poor (< 70%). Correlation was determined as either excellent ([Formula: see text] 0.8), strong (0.6-0.79), moderate (0.4-0.59) or weak (< 0.4).

RESULTS

The data in SweTrau had good accuracy (85.8%), correctness (89.7%) and data completeness (88.5%), as well as strong or excellent correlation (87.5%). Case completeness was 44.3%, however, for NISS > 15 case completeness was 100%. Median time to registration was 4.5 months, with 84.2% registered one year after the trauma. The comparability showed an accordance with the Utstein Template of Trauma of almost 90%.

CONCLUSIONS

The validity of SweTrau is good, with high accuracy, correctness, data completeness and correlation. The data are comparable to other trauma registries using the Utstein Template of Trauma; however, timeliness and case completeness are areas of improvement.

Epidemiology of severe trauma in Navarra for 10 years: out-of-hospital/ in-hospital deaths and survivors

BACKGROUND

Major trauma is a leading cause of death. Due to the difficulties to keep a registry of these cases, few studies include all subjects, because they exclude out-of-hospital deaths. The purpose of this work was to compare the epidemiological profiles of out-of-hospital deaths, in-hospital deaths, and survivors over a 10-year period (2010-2019) of patients who had been treated by Navarre´s Health Service (Spain).

METHODS

Retrospective longitudinal cohort study using data of patients injured by an external physical force of any intentionality and with a New Injury Severity Score above 15. Hangings, drownings, burns, and chokings were excluded. Intergroup differences of demographic and clinical variables were analysed using the Kruskal Wallis test, chi-squared test, or Fisher´s exact test.

RESULTS

Data from 2,610 patients were analysed; 624 died out-of-hospital, 439 in-hospital, and 1,547 survived. Trauma incidences remained moderately stable over the 10-year period analysed, with a slight decrease in out-of-hospital deaths and a slight increase in in-hospital deaths. Patients of the out-of-hospital deaths group were younger (50.9 years) in comparison to in-hospital deaths and survivors. Death victims were predominantly male in all study groups. Intergroup differences regarding prior comorbidities and predominant type of injury were observed.

CONCLUSIONS

There are significant differences among the three study groups. More than half of the deaths occur out-of-hospital and the causative mechanisms differ in each of them. Thus, when designing strategies, preventive measures were considered for each group on a case-by-case basis.

Quality assessment of Major Trauma Registry of Navarra: completeness and correctness

This study assessed the completeness of the Major Trauma Registry of Navarra (MTR-N) data and their concordance with the patients' medical files. It retrospectively reviewed all the MTR-N cases documented in June and July of 2014 and 2015. For each case, 42 parameters' values were taken from the MTR-N. To assess concordance between the MTR-N and medical files, the same variables values were re-recorded. Data completeness was calculated for all cases and data correctness for those documented in the MTR-N, separately for each variable. The overall average completeness rate for all variables was 92.8%. The percentages of completely missing data ranged from 0% (29 variables) to 76.8% (base excess). The overall average rate of correctness was 98.0%. Exact concordance ranged from 93.0% (7 variables) to 100% (22 variables). This study demonstrates the reliability and validity of the MTR-N data and its effectiveness for quality improvement and research in our community.