John E Lawrence1, Duncan Cundall-Curry1, Max E Stewart2, Daniel M Fountain3, Christopher R Gooding1. 1. Department of Trauma and Orthopaedic Surgery, Cambridge University NHS Foundation Trust, Addenbrooke's Hospital, Hills Road, Cambridge, UK. 2. School of Clinical Medicine, University of Cambridge, Addenbrooke's Hospital, Cambridge, UK. 3. Department of Neurosciences, Division of Neurosurgery, Cambridge University NHS Foundation Trust, Addenbrooke's Hospital, Cambridge, UK.
Abstract
AIM: to compare the validity of data submitted from a UK level 1 trauma centre to the National Hip Fracture Database (NHFD) before and after the introduction of an electronic health record system (EHRS). PATIENTS AND METHODS: a total of 3224 records were reviewed from July 2009 to July 2017. 2,133 were submitted between July 2009 and October 2014 and 1,091 between October 2014 and July 2017, representing data submitted before and after the introduction of the EHRS, respectively. Data submitted to the NHFD were scrutinised against locally held data. RESULTS: use of an EHRS was associated with significant reductions in NHFD errors. The operation coding error rate fell significantly from 23.2% (494/2133) to 7.6% (83/1091); P < 0.001. Prior to EHRS introduction, of the 109 deaths recorded in the NHFD, 64 (59%) were incorrect. In the EHRS dataset, all the 112 recorded deaths were correct (P < 0.001). There was no significant difference in the error rate for fracture coding. In the EHRS dataset, after controlling for sample month, entries utilising an operation note template with mandatory fields relevant to NHFD data were more likely to be error free than those not using the template (OR 2.69; 95% CI 1.92-3.78). CONCLUSION: this study highlights a potential benefit of EHR systems, which offer automated data collection for auditing purposes. However, errors in data submitted to the NHFD remain, particularly in cases where an NHFD-specific operation note template is not used. Clinician engagement with new technologies is vital to avoid human error and ensure database integrity.
AIM: to compare the validity of data submitted from a UK level 1 trauma centre to the National Hip Fracture Database (NHFD) before and after the introduction of an electronic health record system (EHRS). PATIENTS AND METHODS: a total of 3224 records were reviewed from July 2009 to July 2017. 2,133 were submitted between July 2009 and October 2014 and 1,091 between October 2014 and July 2017, representing data submitted before and after the introduction of the EHRS, respectively. Data submitted to the NHFD were scrutinised against locally held data. RESULTS: use of an EHRS was associated with significant reductions in NHFD errors. The operation coding error rate fell significantly from 23.2% (494/2133) to 7.6% (83/1091); P < 0.001. Prior to EHRS introduction, of the 109 deaths recorded in the NHFD, 64 (59%) were incorrect. In the EHRS dataset, all the 112 recorded deaths were correct (P < 0.001). There was no significant difference in the error rate for fracture coding. In the EHRS dataset, after controlling for sample month, entries utilising an operation note template with mandatory fields relevant to NHFD data were more likely to be error free than those not using the template (OR 2.69; 95% CI 1.92-3.78). CONCLUSION: this study highlights a potential benefit of EHR systems, which offer automated data collection for auditing purposes. However, errors in data submitted to the NHFD remain, particularly in cases where an NHFD-specific operation note template is not used. Clinician engagement with new technologies is vital to avoid human error and ensure database integrity.