James E Siegler1, Amelia K Boehme2, Adrianne M Dorsey1, Dominique J Monlezun1, Alex J George1, Amir Shaban3, H Jeremy Bockholt4, Karen C Albright5, Sheryl Martin-Schild3. 1. Tulane University School of Medicine, New Orleans, LA, USA. 2. Department of Epidemiology, School of Public Health, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, USA; Department of Neurology, School of Medicine, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, USA. 3. Stroke Program, Department of Neurology, Tulane University Hospital, New Orleans, LA, USA. 4. Advanced Biomedical Informatics Group, LLC, Iowa City, IA, USA; Department of Psychiatry, University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA, USA. 5. Department of Epidemiology, School of Public Health, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, USA; Department of Neurology, School of Medicine, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, USA; Health Services and Outcomes Research Center for Outcome and Effectiveness Research and Education (COERE), University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, USA; Center of Excellence in Comparative Effectiveness Research for Eliminating Disparities (CERED), Minority Health & Health Disparities Research Center (MHRC), University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, USA.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: The use of a medical data registry allows institutions to effectively manage information for many different investigations related to the registry, as well as evaluate patient's trends over time, with the ultimate goal of recognizing trends that may improve outcomes in a particular patient population. METHODS: The purpose of this article is to illustrate our experience with a stroke patient registry at a comprehensive stroke center and highlight advantages, disadvantages, and lessons learned in the process of designing, implementing, and maintaining a stroke registry. We detail the process of stroke registry methodology, common data element (CDE) definitions, the generation of manuscripts from a registry, and the limitations. ADVANTAGES: The largest advantage of a registry is the ability to prospectively add patients, while allowing investigators to go back and collect information retrospectively if needed. The continuous addition of new patients increases the sample size of studies from year to year, and it also allows reflection on clinical practices from previous years and the ability to investigate trends in patient management over time. LIMITATIONS: The greatest limitation in this registry pertains to our single-entry technique where multiple sites of data entry and transfer may generate errors within the registry. LESSONS LEARNED: To reduce the potential for errors and maximize the accuracy and efficiency of the registry, we invest significant time in training competent registry users and project leaders. With effective training and transition of leadership positions, which are continuous and evolving processes, we have attempted to optimize our clinical research registry for knowledge gain and quality improvement at our center.
INTRODUCTION: The use of a medical data registry allows institutions to effectively manage information for many different investigations related to the registry, as well as evaluate patient's trends over time, with the ultimate goal of recognizing trends that may improve outcomes in a particular patient population. METHODS: The purpose of this article is to illustrate our experience with a strokepatient registry at a comprehensive stroke center and highlight advantages, disadvantages, and lessons learned in the process of designing, implementing, and maintaining a stroke registry. We detail the process of stroke registry methodology, common data element (CDE) definitions, the generation of manuscripts from a registry, and the limitations. ADVANTAGES: The largest advantage of a registry is the ability to prospectively add patients, while allowing investigators to go back and collect information retrospectively if needed. The continuous addition of new patients increases the sample size of studies from year to year, and it also allows reflection on clinical practices from previous years and the ability to investigate trends in patient management over time. LIMITATIONS: The greatest limitation in this registry pertains to our single-entry technique where multiple sites of data entry and transfer may generate errors within the registry. LESSONS LEARNED: To reduce the potential for errors and maximize the accuracy and efficiency of the registry, we invest significant time in training competent registry users and project leaders. With effective training and transition of leadership positions, which are continuous and evolving processes, we have attempted to optimize our clinical research registry for knowledge gain and quality improvement at our center.
Entities:
Keywords:
common data elements; epidemiological methods; methodology; registries; source data verification; stroke
Authors: Vincent J Bufalino; Frederick A Masoudi; Steven K Stranne; Katie Horton; Nancy M Albert; Craig Beam; Robert O Bonow; Roger L Vern Davenport; Meighan Girgus; Gregg C Fonarow; Harlan M Krumholz; Mark W Legnini; William R Lewis; Graham Nichol; Eric D Peterson; John S Rumsfeld; Lee H Schwamm; David M Shahian; John A Spertus; Pamela K Woodard; Clyde W Yancy Journal: Circulation Date: 2011-04-11 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Erica M Jones; Karen C Albright; Marco Fossati-Bellani; James E Siegler; Sheryl Martin-Schild Journal: Stroke Date: 2011-09-08 Impact factor: 7.914
Authors: J P Mohr; L R Caplan; J W Melski; R J Goldstein; G W Duncan; J P Kistler; M S Pessin; H L Bleich Journal: Neurology Date: 1978-08 Impact factor: 9.910
Authors: Karen C Albright; Sheryl Martin-Schild; H Jeremy Bockholt; George Howard; Andrei Alexandrov; Anne Alexandrov; M Rick Sline; James C Grotta; Sean I Savitz Journal: Cerebrovasc Dis Extra Date: 2011-11-05
Authors: Tiffany L Mathias; Karen C Albright; Amelia K Boehme; Dominique Monlezun; Alexander J George; Erica Jones; T Mark Beasley; Sheryl Martin-Schild Journal: J Cardiovasc Dis Date: 2014-01
Authors: James E Siegler; Karen C Albright; Alexander J George; Amelia K Boehme; Michael A Gillette; Andre D Kumar; Monica Aswani; Sheryl Martin-Schild Journal: Med Student Res J Date: 2017
Authors: James E Siegler; Amelia K Boehme; Karen C Albright; Alexander J George; Dominique J Monlezun; T Mark Beasley; Sheryl Martin-Schild Journal: J Stroke Cerebrovasc Dis Date: 2013-07-16 Impact factor: 2.136
Authors: Brittany M Gouse; Amelia K Boehme; Dominique J Monlezun; James E Siegler; Alex J George; Katherine Brag; Karen C Albright; T Mark Beasley; Cindy Leissinger; Ramy El Khoury; Sheryl Martin-Schild Journal: Thrombosis Date: 2014-12-17
Authors: Alyana A Samai; Amelia K Boehme; Alexander George; Laurie Schluter; Ramy El Khoury; Sheryl Martin-Schild Journal: Sci Times J Diabetes Date: 2017-03-20