Integration of concurrent trauma registry and performance improvement programs

Classifying, measuring and improving the quality of data in trauma registries: A review of the literature

INTRODUCTION

Globally, injury is a major cause of death and disability. Improvements in trauma care have been driven by trauma registries. The capacity of a trauma registry to inform improvements in the quality of trauma care is dependent upon the quality of data. The literature on data quality in disease registries is inconsistent and ambiguous; methods used for classifying, measuring, and improving data quality are not standardised. The aim of this study was to review the literature to determine the methods used to classify, measure and improve data quality in trauma registries.

METHODS

A scoping review of the literature was performed. Databases were searched using the term "trauma registry" and its synonyms, combined with multiple terms denoting data quality. There was no restriction on year. Full-length manuscripts were included if the classification, measurement or improvement of data quality in one or more trauma registries was a study objective. Data were abstracted regarding registry demographics, study design, data quality classification, and the reported methods used to measure and improve the pre-defined data quality dimensions of accuracy, completeness and capture.

RESULTS

Sixty-nine publications met the inclusion criteria. Four publications classified data quality. The most frequently described methods for measuring data accuracy (n=47) were checks against other datasets (n=18) and checks of injury coding (n=17). The most frequently described methods for measuring data completeness (n=47) were the percentage of included cases, for a given variable or list of variables, for which there was an observation in the registry (n=29). The most frequently described methods for measuring data capture (n=37) were the percentage of cases in a linked reference dataset that were also captured in the primary dataset being evaluated (n=24). Most publications dealing with the measurement of a dimension of data quality did not specify the methods used; most publications dealing with the improvement of data quality did not specify the dimension being targeted.

CONCLUSION

The classification, measurement and improvement of data quality in trauma registries is inconsistent. To maintain confidence in the usefulness of trauma registries, the metrics and reporting of data quality need to be standardised.

A survey of trauma registrars: job requirements, responsibilities, recruitment, and retention

Study purpose was to describe trauma registrar job requirements, responsibilities, and recruitment/retention practices. An online survey was used. One-third required a high school diploma; two-thirds required a college degree. Most required skills were medical terminology (66%), database management (65%), anatomy (64%), Word (63%). Data responsibilities included abstracting, entry, coding, and validating. Few employers required certification. Twenty-six percent reported problems with recruitment, and 35% with retention. Salary and lack of advancement were primary reasons for employee turnover. Certifications were less relevant than skills; the primary focus was data management. Recommendations for recruitment/retention include job flexibility, educational opportunities, and recognition as a profession.

A Comparative Approach to Deep Vein Thrombosis Risk Assessment

Trauma patients are at risk for developing DVT/PE. The Bronson Trauma Model incorporates a DVT scoring system into the daily routine for all injured patients admitted to the Trauma Care Unit. Dr Paul Blostein added the DVT Risk Assessment spreadsheet to his personal digital assistant and made it available to other members of the team to allow calculation of a patient's DVT risk percentage during daily multidisciplinary rounds in the Trauma Care Unit. The Trauma Program has found the incorporation of the scoring systems into the trauma registry to be a value-added component of our performance improvement process. Bronson's unique model of trauma care, where patients are admitted and discharged from the same room, combined with today's technology of wireless laptops and personal digital assistants, promotes a progressive approach to DVT/PE prophylaxis and performance improvement. Our trauma follow-up program has proven to be effective in reintegrating patients back into the trauma system to optimize their functional status and improve their outcome.