On the need of validating inpatient registers.
(2008) In Spinal Cord 46. p.748-752- Abstract
- Study design:Register study.Objectives:To design and implement a validation process to check the completeness of the Hospital Discharge Register (HDR) held by the Swedish National Board of Health and Welfare.Setting:Sweden.Methods:An accurate traumatic spinal cord injury prevalence group (n=495) was acquired from the Swedish Spinalis Clinic. A register control was performed on the group by raising three questions to check the validity of the HDR: Is an inpatient stay registered in association with the injury date? Is the reported first length of stay plausible, given the level and extent of injury? Are all the anticipated care and/or rehabilitation providers represented in the HDR?Results:For 62% (of 413 cases) the first registered... (More)
- Study design:Register study.Objectives:To design and implement a validation process to check the completeness of the Hospital Discharge Register (HDR) held by the Swedish National Board of Health and Welfare.Setting:Sweden.Methods:An accurate traumatic spinal cord injury prevalence group (n=495) was acquired from the Swedish Spinalis Clinic. A register control was performed on the group by raising three questions to check the validity of the HDR: Is an inpatient stay registered in association with the injury date? Is the reported first length of stay plausible, given the level and extent of injury? Are all the anticipated care and/or rehabilitation providers represented in the HDR?Results:For 62% (of 413 cases) the first registered hospitalization date correlated with the injury date. For the other 38%, hospitalization was reported to start between 2 and 8651 days after injury. Considering the level and extent of injury, individuals were reported to have unrealistically short initial hospitalization. The prevalence group visited 42 different hospitals and 47 clinics. Five rehabilitation clinics, though, were not reported.Conclusions:The HDR is a valuable source when conducting epidemiological and health services research. However, using the register without any validation process could, as detected in the investigated diagnosis group, lead to a severe underestimation of the inpatient usage. The study showed that systematic errors could be detected by means of extensive knowledge of the diagnosis group.Spinal Cord advance online publication, 13 May 2008; doi:10.1038/sc.2008.42. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
https://lup.lub.lu.se/record/1154248
- author
- Nordgren, Camilla LU
- organization
- publishing date
- 2008
- type
- Contribution to journal
- publication status
- published
- subject
- keywords
- LOS, inpatient register, administrative database, inpatient care utilization, traumatic spinal cord injury, validation process, certec
- in
- Spinal Cord
- volume
- 46
- pages
- 748 - 752
- publisher
- Nature Publishing Group
- external identifiers
-
- wos:000260639700009
- pmid:18475280
- scopus:58149271082
- pmid:18475280
- ISSN
- 1476-5624
- DOI
- 10.1038/sc.2008.42
- language
- English
- LU publication?
- yes
- id
- 640e5d1d-0495-4633-9a1b-08b86fa85243 (old id 1154248)
- alternative location
- http://www.nature.com/sc/journal/vaop/ncurrent/abs/sc200842a.html
- date added to LUP
- 2016-04-01 14:22:48
- date last changed
- 2025-01-03 23:43:51
@article{640e5d1d-0495-4633-9a1b-08b86fa85243,
abstract = {{Study design:Register study.Objectives:To design and implement a validation process to check the completeness of the Hospital Discharge Register (HDR) held by the Swedish National Board of Health and Welfare.Setting:Sweden.Methods:An accurate traumatic spinal cord injury prevalence group (n=495) was acquired from the Swedish Spinalis Clinic. A register control was performed on the group by raising three questions to check the validity of the HDR: Is an inpatient stay registered in association with the injury date? Is the reported first length of stay plausible, given the level and extent of injury? Are all the anticipated care and/or rehabilitation providers represented in the HDR?Results:For 62% (of 413 cases) the first registered hospitalization date correlated with the injury date. For the other 38%, hospitalization was reported to start between 2 and 8651 days after injury. Considering the level and extent of injury, individuals were reported to have unrealistically short initial hospitalization. The prevalence group visited 42 different hospitals and 47 clinics. Five rehabilitation clinics, though, were not reported.Conclusions:The HDR is a valuable source when conducting epidemiological and health services research. However, using the register without any validation process could, as detected in the investigated diagnosis group, lead to a severe underestimation of the inpatient usage. The study showed that systematic errors could be detected by means of extensive knowledge of the diagnosis group.Spinal Cord advance online publication, 13 May 2008; doi:10.1038/sc.2008.42.}},
author = {{Nordgren, Camilla}},
issn = {{1476-5624}},
keywords = {{LOS; inpatient register; administrative database; inpatient care utilization; traumatic spinal cord injury; validation process; certec}},
language = {{eng}},
pages = {{748--752}},
publisher = {{Nature Publishing Group}},
series = {{Spinal Cord}},
title = {{On the need of validating inpatient registers.}},
url = {{http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/sc.2008.42}},
doi = {{10.1038/sc.2008.42}},
volume = {{46}},
year = {{2008}},
}