|
Affiliation
|
1Axe Santé des populations et pratiques optimales en santé (traumatologie-urgence-soins intensifs), Centre de Recherche du CHU de Québec - Hôpital de l'Enfant-Jésus, Université Laval, Québec City, Québec, Canada; 2Department of social and preventative medicine, Université Laval, Quebec (Qc), Canada. |
|
Abstract
|
BACKGROUND: Trauma registries are clinical databases designed for quality improvement activities and research, and have made important contributions to improvements in trauma care over 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 is 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 data quality based on completeness, accuracy, precision, correctness consistency, or timeliness. We also searched MEDLINE to identify regional, national and international trauma registries whose data was used ≥10 times in original studies in the last 10 years; administrators of those registries were contacted to obtain their latest data quality report. Two authors abstracted the data independently.
RESULTS: The search retrieved 7495 distinct published articles of which 10 were eligible for inclusion. We also reviewed data quality reports from 5 provincial and international trauma registries. Evaluation was mostly based on completeness with values between 46.8% (mechanism of injury) and 100% (age and gender). Accuracy was between 81.0% (operating room time) and 99.8% (gender). No evidence of data precision or timeliness was available. Correctness varied from 47.6% (injury severity score) to 83.2% (Glasgow coma score) and consistency between variables from 87.5% (ICD9-CM/AIS) to 99.6% (procedure time).
CONCLUSIONS: 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. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Systematic review, level I evidence.
Language: en |