Free Standard AU & NZ Shipping For All Book Orders Over $80!
Register      Login
Australian Health Review Australian Health Review Society
Journal of the Australian Healthcare & Hospitals Association
RESEARCH ARTICLE

Maximising the value of hospital administrative datasets

Shyamala G. Nadathur
+ Author Affiliations
- Author Affiliations

Department of Medicine, Monash Medical Centre, Monash University, Clayton, VIC 3168, Australia. Email: shyamala.nadathur@med.monash.edu.au

Australian Health Review 34(2) 216-223 https://doi.org/10.1071/AH09801
Submitted: 1 July 2009  Accepted: 25 November 2009   Published: 25 May 2010

Abstract

Mandatory and standardised administrative data collections are prevalent in the largely public-funded acute sector. In these systems the data collections are used for financial, performance monitoring and reporting purposes. This paper comments on the infrastructure and standards that have been established to support data collection activities, audit and feedback. The routine, local and research uses of these datasets are described using examples from Australian and international literature. The advantages of hospital administrative datasets and opportunities for improvement are discussed under the following headings: accessibility, standardisation, coverage, completeness, cost of obtaining clinical data, recorded Diagnostic Related Groups and International Classification of Diseases codes, linkage and connectivity. In an era of diminishing resources better utilisation of these datasets should be encouraged. Increased study and scrutiny will enhance transparency and help identify issues in the collections. As electronic information systems are increasingly embraced, administrative data collections need to be managed as valuable assets and powerful operational and patient management tools.

Additional keywords: administrative data; casemix; data collection; health care quality, access, and evaluation; health services administration; health services research; hospital administration; hospital information systems; information management; information storage and retrieval; morbidity; mortality; patient care.


Acknowledgements

This paper and the expressed ideas form part of the doctorate thesis of the author at Monash University. The author is grateful to Professor Jim Warren (Chair in Health Informatics, University of Auckland, New Zealand) for the critical review of this paper.


References


[1] McLoughlin V,  Leatherman S. Quality or financing: what drives design of the health care system? Qual Saf Health Care 2003; 12(2): 136–42.
Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | PubMed | CAS | [verified 21 April 2009].

[7] VDH. Victoria – Public hospitals and mental health services policy and funding guidelines 2008–09 – General conditions of funding. Melbourne, Australia: Victorian Department of Health (VDH); 2007.

[8] AIHW. A guide to data development. Canberra, ACT, Australia: Australian Institute of Health and Welfare (AIHW), Canberra, Australia; 2007.

[9] NEHTA. National e-health standards development: A management framework. National E-Health Transition Authority (NEHTA); 2006. pp. 1–26.

[10] AIHW. Data Standards. Canberra, Australia: Australian Institute of Health and Welfare (AIHW), Canberra, Australia; 2008. Available at http://www.aihw.gov.au/datadevelopment/index.cfm [verified January 2009].

[11] VDH. Improving Information Practices in Victorian Department of Human Services. Department of Health (VDH), Melbourne, Victoria, Australia; 2001. pp. 1–40.

[12] Heslop L,  Gardner B,  Diers D,  Poh BC. Using clinical data for nursing research and management in health services. Contemp Nurse 2004; 17(1–2): 8–18.
PubMed | [verified June 2009].

[30] VDH. Multi-site research. Melbourne, Australia: Victorian Department of Health (VDH); 2009. Available at http://www.health.vic.gov.au/ethics/multi/index.htm [verified June 2009].

[31] Iezzoni LI. How much are we willing to pay for information about quality of care? Ann Intern Med 1997; 126(5): 391–3.
PubMed |  CAS | [verified 29 May 2009].

[42] NCCH. The International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems, 10th Revision, Australian Modification (ICD-10-AM) – 3rd Edition. Sydney: National Centre for Classification in Health (NCCH); 2002.

[43] Roberts RF,  Innes KC,  Walker SM. Introducing ICD-10-AM in Australian hospitals. Med J Aust 1998; 169(Suppl): S32–5.
PubMed |

[44] Nadathur SG,  Groom A. Coding and DRG relationships in stroke and transient ischaemic attack (TIA). Health Information Management Journal 2006; 35(1): 38–44.


[45] Shapiro MF,  Park RE,  Keesey J,  Brook RH. The effect of alternative case-mix adjustments on mortality differences between municipal and voluntary hospitals in New York City. Health Serv Res 1994; 29(1): 95–112.
PubMed |  CAS |

[46] Charlson ME,  Pompei P,  Ales KL,  MacKenzie CR. A new method of classifying prognostic comorbidity in longitudinal studies: development and validation. J Chronic Dis 1987; 40(5): 373–83.
Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | PubMed | CAS |

[47] Polanczyk CA,  Rohde LE,  Philbin EA,  Di Salvo TG. A new Casemix adjustment index for hospital mortality among patients with congestive heart failure. Med Care 1998; 36(10): 1489–99.
Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | PubMed | CAS |

[48] D’Hoore W,  Bouckaert A,  Tilquin C. Practical considerations on the use of the Charlson Comorbidity Index with administrative data bases. J Clin Epidemiol 1996; 49(12): 1429–33.
Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | PubMed | CAS |

[49] Chaudhry S,  Jin L,  Meltzer D. Use of a self-report-generated Charlson Comorbidity Index for predicting mortality. Med Care 2005; 43(6): 607–15.
Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | PubMed |

[50] Ghali WA,  Hall RE,  Rosen AK,  Ash AS,  Moskowitz MA. Searching for an improved clinical comorbidity index for use with ICD-9-CM administrative data. J Clin Epidemiol 1996; 49(3): 273–8.
Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | PubMed | CAS |

[51] Needham DM,  Scales DC,  Laupacis A,  Pronovost PJ. A systematic review of the Charlson comorbidity index using Canadian administrative databases: A perspective on risk adjustment in critical care research. J Crit Care 2005; 20(1): 12–9.
Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | PubMed |

[52] Schneeweiss S,  Maclure M,  Schneeweiss S,  Maclure M. Use of comorbidity scores for control of confounding in studies using administrative databases. Int J Epidemiol 2000; 29(5): 891–8.
Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | PubMed | CAS |

[53] Klabunde CN,  Potosky AL,  Legler JM,  Warren JL. Development of a comorbidity index using physician claims data. J Clin Epidemiol 2000; 53(12): 1258–67.
Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | PubMed | CAS |

[54] Romano PS,  Roos LL,  Jollis JG,  Romano PS,  Roos LL,  Jollis JG. Further evidence concerning the use of a clinical comorbidity index for use with ICD-9-CM administrative data: Differing perspectives. J Clin Epidemiol 1993; 46(10): 1085–90.
Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |

[55] Romano PS,  Roos LL,  Jollis JG. Variance and Dissent Presentation: Adapting a clinical comorbidity index for use with ICD-9-CM administrative data: differing perspectives. J Clin Epidemiol 1993; 46(10): 1075–9.
Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | PubMed | CAS |

[56] Roos LL,  Menec V,  Currie RJ. Policy analysis in an information-rich environment. Soc Sci Med 2004; 58(11): 2231–41.
Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | PubMed |

[57] Williams TA,  Dobb GJ,  Finn JC,  Knuiman M,  Lee KY,  Geelhoed E, et al. Data linkage enables evaluation of long-term survival after intensive care. Anaesth Intensive Care 2006; 34(3): 307–15.
PubMed |  CAS |

[58] Stone CA , Ramsden CA , Howard JA , Roberts M , Halliday JH . From data linkage to policy and back again: A preliminary report on the linkage of neonatal data in Victoria. Symposium on Health Data Linkage: Its value for Australian health policy development and policy relevant research; 2002, March 20–21 Sydney, NSW, Australia. Public Health Information Development Unit (PHIDU), Adelaide University; 2002. pp. 209–11.

[59] Sundararajan V , Henderson TM , Ackland M , Marshall R . Linkage of the Victorian Admitted Episodes Dataset. Symposium on Health Data Linkage: Its value for Australian health policy development and policy relevant research; 2002, March 20–21; Sydney, NSW, Australia. Public Health Information Development Unit (PHIDU), Adelaide University; 2002. pp. 212–5.

[60] Karmel R,  Rosman D. Linkage of health and aged care service events: comparing linkage and event selection methods. BMC Health Serv Res 2008; 8 149.
Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | PubMed |

[61] Robinson JR,  Young TK,  Roos LL,  Gelskey DE. Estimating the burden of disease: Comparing administrative data and self-reports. Med Care 1997; 35(9): 932–47.
Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | PubMed | CAS |

[62] Semmens JB,  Platell C,  Threlfall TJ,  Holman CD. A population-based study of the incidence, mortality and outcomes in patients following surgery for colorectal cancer in Western Australia. Aust N Z J Surg 2000; 70(1): 11–8.
Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | PubMed | CAS |

[63] NEHTA. Action plan for adoption success: The response to the independent review of NEHTA. National E-Health Transition Authority (NEHTA); 2007. pp. 1–10.

[64] Andriessen DG. Stuff or love? How metaphors direct our efforts to manage knowledge in organisations. Knowledge Management Research and Practice 2008; 6 5–12.
Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |

[65] van Gool K,  Lancsar E,  Viney R,  Hall J,  Haywood P. Diagnosis and prognosis of Australia’s health information for evidence-based policy. J Health Serv Res Policy 2002; 7(Suppl 1): 40–5.
Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | PubMed |