Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-l7hp2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-28T00:35:05.390Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Along the Data-Information Continuum: Pitfalls and Opportunities

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  21 June 2016

William B. Crede  and
Walter J. Hierholzer Jr.
William B. Crede
Affiliation:
Departments of Quality Assurance, Yale-New Haven Hospital, New Haven, Connecticut
Walter J. Hierholzer Jr.*
Affiliation:
Hospital Epidemiology, Yale-New Haven Hospital, New Haven, Connecticut
*
Department of Hospital Epidemiology, Yale-New Harm Hospital, New Haven, CT 06504
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The need for accurate data concerning nosocomial infections has long been appreciated by infection control practitioners. Several major changes in the health delivery environment have highlighted for other care givers and managers the importance of, and indeed necessity of high-quality clinical and financial hospital information. Since 1983, the Medicare prospective payment system (PPS) has used the medical record discharge abstract as the hospital bill. This has created a need for more detailed clinical information in hospital information systems. In several states, all third-party reimbursers are using PPS variants, further strengthening this incentive. The “Agenda for Change” of the Joint Commission on Accreditation of Healthcare Organizations has created further pressure on hospitals to acquire information concerning the quality of care at their own facility, as well as comparative statistics from other facilities. Although trade journals extol the virtues of “good data sets,” and much academic study has been given to individual facets of data processing and handling, the practical aspects of hospital information opportunities and problems have been largely ignored. The purpose of this article is to discuss the nature of hospital data; to detail available sources of national, regional, and local hospital statistics; to delineate potential quality problems common to many types of hospital information; and to discuss difficulties with and solutions to some hospital data application problems.

Type
Special Sections
Information
Infection Control & Hospital Epidemiology , Volume 9 , Issue 4 , April 1988 , pp. 166 - 169
Copyright
Copyright © The Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America 1988

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1. Joint Commission on Accreditation of Healthcare Organizations: News about agenda for change. Agenda for Change Update 1987; 1:1–4.Google Scholar
2. ML, Robinson: Hospitals with the best data sets win. Hospitals 1987; 61:32–34.Google Scholar
3. AR, Feinstein: Taxonorics I. Formulation or criteria. Arch intern Med 1970; 120:679–694.Google Scholar
4. Killip, T. JT, Kimball: Treatment of myocardial infarction in a coronary care unit. Am J Cardioidl; 20:457–464.10.1016/0002-9149(67)90023-9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
5. MS, Blois: Information holds medicine together. M.D. Computing 1987: 4:42–46.Google Scholar
6. AU, Feinstein: An additional basic science for medicine: IV. The development of clinimetrics. Ann Intern Med 1983; 99:843–848.Google Scholar
7. JG, Turcotte: Portal hypertension as I see it, in Child, C (ed): Portal Hypertension. Philadelphia, WB Saunders, 1974, p 78.Google Scholar
8. KM, Norris. Brandt, PWT, Caughey, DE, et al: A new coronary prognostic index. Lancet 1969; 1:274–281.Google Scholar
9. Ginsberg, PB, GM, Carter: Medicare case-mix increase. Health Care Financing Reviews 1986; 7:51–65.Google Scholar
10. Kosecoff, J, Ghassin, MR, Fink, A, et al: Obtaining clinical data on the appropriateness of medical c-are in community practice. JAMA 1987; 258:2538–2542.10.1001/jama.1987.03400180072029CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1 I. The automation explosion. QRC Advisor 1986: 2(7): 1–4.Google Scholar
12. Simborg, DW, Chadwick, M, QE, Whiting-O'Keefe. et al: Local area networks and the hospital. Comput Biomed Res 1983; 16:247–259.10.1016/0010-4809(83)90025-3CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
13. Massanari, RM, Wilkerson, K, Streed, SA, et al: Reliability of reporting nosocomial infections in the discharge abstract and implications tor receipt of revenues under prospective payment. Am Public Health 1987; 77:561–564.10.2105/AJPH.77.5.561CrossRefGoogle Scholar
14. Haley, RW, DR, Schaberg, McClish, DK, et al: The accuracy of retrospective chart review in measuring nosocomial infection rates. Am J Epidemiol 1980; 111:516–533.10.1093/oxfordjournals.aje.a112931CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
15. RW, Haley. DH, Culver. White, JW, et al: The efficacy of infection surveillance and control programs in preventing nosocomial infections in US hospitals. Am J Epidemiol 1985; 103:183–205.Google Scholar
16. KS, Evans. RA, Larsen. Burke, JP, et al: Computer surveillance of hospital-acquired infections and antibiotic use. JAMA 1986; 256: 1007–101 I.Google Scholar
17. DW, Simborg: DRG creep: A new hospital-acquired illness. N Engl J Med 1981; 304: 1602–1604.Google Scholar
18. LF, McMahon Jr, HL, Smits: Can Medicare prospective payment survive the ICD-9-CM disease classification system? Ann Intern Med 1986; 104:562–566.Google Scholar
19. IL, Freeman, Fetter, RB, RC, Newbold. et al: Development and adaptation of a hospital cost and budgeting model for cross national use. Presented at “Knowing, learning, and sharing management tools in health care,” 06 1985.Google Scholar
20. LL, Roos, SM, Cageorge. Austen, E. et al: Using computers to identify complications after surgery Am J Public Health 1985; 75:1288–1295.Google Scholar