Literature DB >> 29644567

How accurate is the data provided to the Irish hip fracture database?

Andrew J Hughes1, Orla Hennessy2, Louise Brennan3, Abdullah Rana4, Colin G Murphy4.   

Abstract

National databases, such as the Irish Hip Fracture Database (IHFD), are known to contain inaccuracies. The coordination of services, national funding and future research rely on the integrity of the IHFD so as to avoid policy and budget planning being based on misrepresentative data. An audit was performed to assess the accuracy of the 2016 IHFD data collected in our trauma unit. The Hospital In-Patient Enquiry (HIPE)-recorded fracture classification, IHFD-recorded fracture classification and IHFD-recorded operation performed for each hip fracture patient was identified. Each variable was compared with the classifications and procedures derived by the authors. Two hundred fifty-two cases were identified. The HIPE-recorded fracture classification was accurate in 29% of cases, and the IHFD-recorded fracture classification in 61% (p < 0.001). The IHFD-recorded operation performed was accurate in 76% of cases. Thirty-six cases (14%) were omitted by HIPE, and eight (3%) from the local IHFD (p < 0.001). Errors resulted from poor documentation, in determining the presence of fracture displacement, prosthesis coating and intramedullary nail length. Diagnoses and procedures were identified from ward and theatre logbooks that the data coordinator was unable to record. The data coordinator in our unit doubled the accuracy of the data, and reduced the rate of omitted cases by a factor of 4.5. Accuracy levels would be significantly improved with clear, thorough documentation by the medical team following education of junior surgical trainees on hip fracture classification and procedural coding. Inaccurate data has a negative effect on hospital reimbursement and compromises the integrity of the IHFD.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Accuracy; Audit; Documentation; Hip fracture; Irish Hip Fracture Database; National Database

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29644567     DOI: 10.1007/s11845-018-1810-5

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ir J Med Sci        ISSN: 0021-1265            Impact factor:   1.568


  6 in total

Review 1.  On challenges in clinical assessment of hip fracture risk using image-based biomechanical modelling: a critical review.

Authors:  Yunhua Luo
Journal:  J Bone Miner Metab       Date:  2021-01-09       Impact factor: 2.626

2.  The Danish Multidisciplinary Hip Fracture Registry 13-Year Results from a Population-Based Cohort of Hip Fracture Patients.

Authors:  Pia Kjær Kristensen; Niels Dieter Röck; Helle Collatz Christensen; Alma Becic Pedersen
Journal:  Clin Epidemiol       Date:  2020-01-09       Impact factor: 4.790

3.  Key Service Improvements After the Introduction of an Integrated Orthogeriatric Service.

Authors:  R P Murphy; C Reddin; E P Murphy; R Waters; C G Murphy; M Canavan
Journal:  Geriatr Orthop Surg Rehabil       Date:  2019-12-11

4.  Hip fracture care during Covid-19: a regional trauma centre's experience.

Authors:  Geoff Crozier-Shaw; Andrew J Hughes; Breda Conlon; Eoin Sheehan; Khalid Merghani
Journal:  Ir J Med Sci       Date:  2021-01-03       Impact factor: 1.568

5.  Instant messaging apps and data protection: combining to improve hip fracture care?

Authors:  Geoff Crozier-Shaw; Andrew J Hughes; James Cashman; Keith Synnott
Journal:  Ir J Med Sci       Date:  2021-04-05       Impact factor: 2.089

Review 6.  Differences in hip fracture care in Europe: a systematic review of recent annual reports of hip fracture registries.

Authors:  Maic Werner; Christian Macke; Manfred Gogol; Christian Krettek; Emmanouil Liodakis
Journal:  Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg       Date:  2021-10-08       Impact factor: 2.374

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.