Evidence of data quality in trauma registries: A systematic review

被引:48
|
作者
Porgo, Teegwende Valerie [1 ,2 ,3 ]
Moore, Lynne [1 ,2 ,3 ]
Tardif, Pier-Alexandre [1 ,2 ,3 ]
机构
[1] Univ Laval, Axe Sante Populat & Prat Optim Sante Traumatol Ur, Quebec City, PQ, Canada
[2] Univ Laval, CHU Quebec, Ctr Rech, Hop Enfants Jesus, Quebec City, PQ, Canada
[3] Univ Laval, Dept Social & Prevent Med, Quebec City, PQ, Canada
来源
关键词
Trauma registry; data quality; evaluation; report; systematic review; MISSING DATA; MULTIPLE IMPUTATION; CARE; VALIDATION; EPIDEMIOLOGY; INFORMATION; INDICATORS; GUIDELINES; INJURIES;
D O I
10.1097/TA.0000000000000970
中图分类号
R4 [临床医学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100602 ;
摘要
BACKGROUND Trauma registries are clinical databases designed for quality improvement activities and research and have made important contributions to the improvements in trauma care during the last few decades. The effectiveness of trauma registries in improving patient outcomes depends on data quality (DQ). However, our understanding of DQ in trauma registries is limited. The objective of this study was to review evidence of the completeness, accuracy, precision, correctness, consistency, and timeliness of data in trauma registries. METHODS A systematic review using MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, CINAHL, and The Cochrane Library was performed including studies evaluating trauma registry DQ based on completeness, accuracy, precision, correctness, consistency, or timeliness. We also searched MEDLINE to identify regional, national, and international trauma registries whose data were used 10 times or more in original studies in the last 10years; administrators of those registries were contacted to obtain their latest DQ report. Two authors abstracted the data independently. RESULTS The search retrieved 7,495 distinct published articles, of which 10 were eligible for inclusion. We also reviewed DQ reports from five provincial and international trauma registries. Evaluation was mostly based on completeness with values between 46.8% (mechanism of injury) and 100% (age and sex). Accuracy was between 81.0% (operating room time) and 99.8% (sex). No evidence of data precision or timeliness was available. Correctness varied from 47.6% (Injury Severity Score [ISS]) to 83.2% (Glasgow Coma Scale [GCS] score) and consistency between variables from 87.5% (International Classification of Disease9th Rev.Clinical Modification [ICD-9-CM]/Abbreviated Injury Scale [AIS]) to 99.6% (procedure time). CONCLUSION In the few studies we identified, DQ evaluation in trauma registries was mostly based on completeness. There is a need to develop a standardized and reproducible method to evaluate DQ in trauma registries. Determinants of DQ and the impact of DQ on trauma registry analyses such as benchmarking with quality indicators should also be explored.
引用
收藏
页码:648 / 658
页数:11
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] Schmerzregister und verwandte DatensammlungenEine ÜbersichtsarbeitPain registries and similar data collectionsA systematic review
    A. Freytag
    B. Scriba
    U. Kaiser
    W. Meißner
    [J]. Der Schmerz, 2016, 30 (6) : 568 - 575
  • [42] A global overview of renal registries: a systematic review
    Liu, Frank Xiaoqing
    Rutherford, Peter
    Smoyer-Tomic, Karen
    Prichard, Sarah
    Laplante, Suzanne
    [J]. BMC NEPHROLOGY, 2015, 16
  • [43] Physical therapy registries worldwide: A systematic review
    Yazdipour, Alireza Banaye
    Ayyoubzadeh, Seyed Mohammad
    Nazary-Moghadam, Salman
    Arji, Goli
    Meigooni, Fatemeh Sadat Mirmohammad
    Kimiafar, Khalil
    Shahmoradi, Leila
    [J]. HEALTH SCIENCE REPORTS, 2024, 7 (09)
  • [44] Global systematic review of primary immunodeficiency registries
    Abolhassani, Hassan
    Azizi, Gholamreza
    Sharifi, Laleh
    Yazdani, Reza
    Mohsenzadegan, Monireh
    Delavari, Samaneh
    Sohani, Mahsa
    Shirmast, Paniz
    Chavoshzadeh, Zahra
    Mahdaviani, Seyed Alireza
    Kalantari, Arash
    Tavakol, Marzieh
    Jabbari-Azad, Farahzad
    Ahanchian, Hamid
    Momen, Tooba
    Sherkat, Roya
    Sadeghi-Shabestari, Mahnaz
    Aleyasin, Soheila
    Esmaeilzadeh, Hossein
    Al-Herz, Waleed
    Bousfiha, Ahmed Aziz
    Condino-Neto, Antonio
    Seppanen, Mikko
    Sullivan, Kathleen E.
    Hammarstrom, Lennart
    Modell, Vicki
    Modell, Fred
    Quinn, Jessica
    Orange, Jordan S.
    Aghamohammadi, Asghar
    [J]. EXPERT REVIEW OF CLINICAL IMMUNOLOGY, 2020, 16 (07) : 717 - 732
  • [45] A global overview of renal registries: a systematic review
    Frank Xiaoqing Liu
    Peter Rutherford
    Karen Smoyer-Tomic
    Sarah Prichard
    Suzanne Laplante
    [J]. BMC Nephrology, 16
  • [46] Global Experience of Diabetes Registries: A Systematic Review
    Naemi, Roya
    Shahmoradi, Leila
    [J]. DIABETES: FROM RESEARCH TO CLINICAL PRACTICE, VOL 4, 2021, 1307 : 441 - 455
  • [47] Artificial Nutritional Support Registries: systematic review
    Castello-Botia, I.
    Wanden-Berghe, C.
    Sanz-Valero, J.
    [J]. NUTRICION HOSPITALARIA, 2009, 24 (06) : 711 - 716
  • [48] Improving Quality of Emergency Care in India by Implementing Trauma Registries
    Gupta, Amit
    Kaushik, Gaurav
    Sharma, Ankita
    Kumar, Subodh
    Sagar, Sushma
    [J]. INDIAN JOURNAL OF NEUROTRAUMA, 2019, 16 (2-3): : 124 - 129
  • [49] The role of big data management, data registries, and machine learning algorithms for optimizing safe definitive surgery in trauma: a review
    Pape, Hans-Christoph
    Starr, Adam J.
    Gueorguiev, Boyko
    Wanner, Guido A.
    [J]. PATIENT SAFETY IN SURGERY, 2024, 18 (01):
  • [50] Evidence for the impact of quality improvement collaboratives: systematic review
    Schouten, Loes M. T.
    Hulscher, Marlies E. J. L.
    van Everdingen, Jannes J. E.
    Huijsman, Robbert
    Grol, Richard P. T. M.
    [J]. BMJ-BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, 2008, 336 (7659): : 1491 - +