Samuel Morris1, James Booth2, James Hegarty2. 1. Queen's Medical Centre, Nottingham University Hospitals, Nottingham, UK. samuel.morris@nuh.nhs.uk. 2. Queen's Medical Centre, Nottingham University Hospitals, Nottingham, UK.
Abstract
PURPOSE: The study reports the feasibility of implementing routine registry data collection and sustaining a high rate of data capture within a secondary care spinal osteopathy service, using the Spine Tango Conservative registry data collection tool (STC) with multiple patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs): Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), Neck Disability Index (NDI), COMI Low Back Conservative, COMI Neck Conservative and EQ-5D-3L. METHODS: Data collection rates were studied during the implementation of a registry data collection project from October 2011 to June 2015. The primary outcome was completion rate of PROMs and the STC, measured as a percentage of total expected data collection. Descriptive statistics were used to illustrate completion rates by year, age group, sex, region of spinal complaint, baseline ODI or NDI score and number of PROMs required to complete the data set. RESULTS: Data were collected on 349 patients. Overall data collection rates increased from 54.8 % in January-June 2012 to 90.4 % in January-June 2015. The percentage of fully completed data sets was lower in the patient group required to complete 4-5 PROMs at each data collection point (15.4 %) than it was in the patient group required to complete 2-3 PROMs (37.4 %). Other comparisons showed no clear patterns. CONCLUSIONS: Our analysis shows that a high rate of data capture can be sustained in a clinical setting using the STC and multiple PROMs. However, increasing the burden of data collection on patients and practitioners was associated with increased data loss. We describe measures taken to reduce data loss in the future and to increase the efficiency of the data collection project.
PURPOSE: The study reports the feasibility of implementing routine registry data collection and sustaining a high rate of data capture within a secondary care spinal osteopathy service, using the Spine Tango Conservative registry data collection tool (STC) with multiple patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs): Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), Neck Disability Index (NDI), COMI Low Back Conservative, COMI Neck Conservative and EQ-5D-3L. METHODS: Data collection rates were studied during the implementation of a registry data collection project from October 2011 to June 2015. The primary outcome was completion rate of PROMs and the STC, measured as a percentage of total expected data collection. Descriptive statistics were used to illustrate completion rates by year, age group, sex, region of spinal complaint, baseline ODI or NDI score and number of PROMs required to complete the data set. RESULTS: Data were collected on 349 patients. Overall data collection rates increased from 54.8 % in January-June 2012 to 90.4 % in January-June 2015. The percentage of fully completed data sets was lower in the patient group required to complete 4-5 PROMs at each data collection point (15.4 %) than it was in the patient group required to complete 2-3 PROMs (37.4 %). Other comparisons showed no clear patterns. CONCLUSIONS: Our analysis shows that a high rate of data capture can be sustained in a clinical setting using the STC and multiple PROMs. However, increasing the burden of data collection on patients and practitioners was associated with increased data loss. We describe measures taken to reduce data loss in the future and to increase the efficiency of the data collection project.
Entities:
Keywords:
Clinical governance; Data collection; Osteopathy; Patient outcome assessment; Registries
Authors: Christopher J Standaert; Janna Friedly; Mark W Erwin; Michael J Lee; Glenn Rechtine; Nora B Henrikson; Daniel C Norvell Journal: Spine (Phila Pa 1976) Date: 2011-10-01 Impact factor: 3.468
Authors: John DeVine; Daniel C Norvell; Erika Ecker; Daryl R Fourney; Alex Vaccaro; Jeff Wang; Gunnar Andersson Journal: Spine (Phila Pa 1976) Date: 2011-10-01 Impact factor: 3.468