Data Collection
Process:
| Case Finding
Procedure: |
Case finding is a strategy used to
identify potential cases of infants who may have a reportable birth defect,
diagnosed within the first year of life. This requires that the Arizona
Birth Defects Monitoring Program (ABDMP) staff merge the lists of potential
cases from various data sources to eliminate duplicates and assure complete case
ascertainment. A final list is prepared for the corresponding medical
facility with a request to retrieve charts for review.
|
| Abstracting: |
Reporting rules (Arizona Administrative Code Title 9,
Chapter 4) define the access of the ABDMP to information
on infants who may birth defects from various data sources. The ABDMP
staff to review the charts and abstract the cases, which meet the
criteria for inclusion (see Case Definition). |
| Coding: |
The ABDMP staff code the birth defects
using British Pediatric Association (BPA) codes.
|
| Data Entry |
The abstracts are entered into the
oracle data base after being checked or completeness and accuracy. |
Data
Quality:
The usefulness of ABDMP
depends upon the quality of its data. International standards for
completeness and accuracy rates are established at 95% for each component.
To assure that ABDMP has usable data, it is necessary to quality control the
data for completeness and accuracy.
The data quality process
involves routine quality control, an audit of the case finding, a re-abstraction
study, and an audit of the data entry.
| Routine Quality
Control: |
The first
level of quality control involves the review by the ABDMP Program Manager
of all (100%) of the abstracts prepared by the abstractors for completeness and
accuracy prior to data entry. A complete item-by-item inspection is undertaken
to determine if the required data is recorded and the data is accurate and
consistent. In addition, each recorded diagnosis with its confirmation and its
selected BPA code is reviewed for accuracy by referring to the information
entered in the Results of Diagnostic Tests and Procedures Narrative section of
the abstract and by referring to the coding instructions for reportable
congenital anomalies. Resolution of any errors, omissions, or
inconsistencies is accomplished during the discussions with the responsible
abstractors.
When a case
is identified from several facilities, the abstracts of that case are
merged. The Program Manager analyzes the findings to look for the final
diagnoses and make corrections to the abstracts.
|
| Case Finding Audit: |
Annually 20% of the
hospitals/facilities are randomly selected for case finding audits. A case
finding list is prepared from a sample of the hospital's Disease Index and other
case finding sources for comparison with the original case finding list
created. If more than 5% of the probable cases do not appear on the
original case finding list, a 100% audit will be conducted, and the ABDMP staff
will receive additional training to improve the case finding process used. |
| Re-Abstraction Study: |
Annually 10
to 50% of the abstracts from 20% of the hospitals/facilities are randomly
selected for the re-abstracting study (the percentage of abstracts selected for
audit depends on the size of the hospital/facility). The quality assurance
person (QAP) reviews each chart and re-abstracts reportable data to evaluate the
following:
The QAP will
review the discrepancies with the responsible abstractors. If the
re-abstraction study shows that the frequency of completeness and/or accuracy is
less than 95% in any hospital/facility, then a 100% audit on the possible cases
will be conducted in that facility.
|
| Data Entry
Verification: |
The QAP
verifies the data entry of a sample of abstracts (20%) of the year of interest
by accessing the ABDMP automated system to compare what was entered to what was
recorded on each abstract. If the frequency of accuracy is less than 95%,
then a 100% audit will be performed on the data entry.
To achieve
and maintain quality of data and to be cost-effective, the ABDMP provides to the
staff complete documentation of abstracting and coding rules, formal and
informal training and timely feedback.
|
|