The quality of denominator data in surgical site infection surveillance versus administrative data in Norway 2005-2010

BMC Infectious Diseases

Volumn 15, Issue 1, 2015, Pages

  Løwer, Hege Line ^a   Eriksen, Hanne Merete ^a   Aavitsland, Preben ^b   Skjeldestad, Finn Egil ^c  

^a NORWEGIAN INSTITUTE OF PUBLIC HEALTH   (Norway)

^b Epidemi   (Norway)

^c UNIVERSITY OF TROMSØ   (Norway)

Author keywords

Completeness; Electronic surveillance; Incidence; Infection control; Register data; Representativeness

Indexed keywords

AGE; ARTICLE; DATA EXTRACTION; DATA PROCESSING; DISEASE SURVEILLANCE; EXPLANATORY VARIABLE; GENDER; HUMAN; INFECTION PREVENTION; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; NORWAY; QUALITY CONTROL; RISK FACTOR; SURGICAL INFECTION; SURGICAL TECHNIQUE; BENCHMARKING; CROSS INFECTION; HEALTH CARE QUALITY; HEALTH SURVEY; HOSPITAL; PROCEDURES; STATISTICS AND NUMERICAL DATA; SURGICAL WOUND INFECTION;

BENCHMARKING; CROSS INFECTION; HOSPITALS; HUMANS; NORWAY; POPULATION SURVEILLANCE; QUALITY OF HEALTH CARE; SURGICAL WOUND INFECTION;

EID: 84959201369     PISSN: None     EISSN: 14712334     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1186/s12879-015-1289-x     Document Type: Article

References (35)

1. ECDC. Surveillance of surgical site infections in Europe 2010-2011. In: ECDC Survellance report. Stockholm: European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control; 2013.
2. HOD. Norwegian Surveillance System for Antibiotic Consumption and Healthcare-Associated Infections (NOIS) Act. Oslo: Lovdata, Ministry of Health and Care Services; 2005.
3. Lower HL, Eriksen HM, Aavitsland P, Skjeldestad FE. Methodology of the Norwegian Surveillance System for Healthcare-Associated Infections: the value of a mandatory system, automated data collection, and active postdischarge surveillance. Am J Infect Control. 2013;41(7):591-6.
4. Lower HL, Dale H, Eriksen HM, Aavitsland P, Skjeldestad FE. Surgical site infections after hip arthroplasty in Norway, 2005-2011: influence of duration and intensity of postdischarge surveillance. Am J Infect Control. 2015;43(4):323-8.
5. HELICS. Hospitals in Europe Link for Infection Control through Surveillance. In: Surveillance of Surgical Site Infections Protocol v. 9.1. 2004.
6. ECDC. Surveillance of surgical site infections in European hospitals- HAISSI protocol. V 1.02. Stockholm: European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control; 2012.
7. Horan TC, Gaynes RP, Martone WJ, Jarvis WR, Emori TG. CDC definitions of nosocomial surgical site infections, 1992: a modification of CDC definitions of surgical wound infections. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 1992;13(10):606-8.
8. German RR, Lee LM, Horan JM, Milstein RL, Pertowski CA, Waller MN, Guidelines Working Group Centers for Disease C, Prevention. Updated guidelines for evaluating public health surveillance systems: recommendations from the Guidelines Working Group. MMWR Recomm Rep. 2001;50(RR-13):1-35. quiz CE31-37.
9. HOD. The Norwegian Patient Register Act. Oslo: Lovdata, Ministry of Health and Care Services; 2012.
10. Bakken IJ, Nyland K, Halsteinli V, Kvam UH, Skjeldestad FE. Norsk pasientregister: Administrativ database med mange forskningsmuligheter. Norsk Epidemiologi. 2004;14(1):65-9.
11. NOMESCO. NOMESCO Classification of Surgical Procedures (NCSP), version 1.16. Copenhagen: Nordic Medico-Statistical Committee (NOMESCO); 2009.
12. NAR: Report June 2015. In.Bergen: Norwegian Arthroplasty Register; 2015
13. Woeltje KF, Lin MY, Klompas M, Wright MO, Zuccotti G, Trick WE. Data requirements for electronic surveillance of healthcare-associated infections. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 2014;35(9):1083-91.
14. Goto M, Ohl ME, Schweizer ML, Perencevich EN. Accuracy of administrative code data for the surveillance of healthcare-associated infections: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Clin Infect Dis. 2014;58(5):688-96.
15. McCoubrey J, Reilly J, Mullings A, Pollock KG, Johnston F. Validation of surgical site infection surveillance data in Scotland. J Hosp Infect. 2005;61(3):194-200.
16. Haley VB, Van Antwerpen C, Tserenpuntsag B, Gase KA, Hazamy P, Doughty D, et al. Use of administrative data in efficient auditing of hospital-acquired surgical site infections, New York State 2009-2010. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 2012;33(6):565-71.
17. Backe B, Heggestad T, Lie T. The epidemic of Caesarean section: has it reached Norway? Tidsskr Nor Laegeforen. 2003;123(11):1522-4.
18. Haug ES, Romundstad P, Saether OD, Jorgenvag R, Myhre HO. Quality of data reported on abdominal aortic aneurysm repair--a comparison between a national vascular and a national administrative registry. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2005;29(6):571-8.
19. Espehaug B, Furnes O, Havelin LI, Engesaeter LB, Vollset SE, Kindseth O. Registration completeness in the Norwegian Arthroplasty Register. Acta Orthop. 2006;77(1):49-56.
20. Haustein T, Gastmeier P, Holmes A, Lucet J-C, Shannon RP, Pittet D, et al. Use of benchmarking and public reporting for infection control in four high-income countries. Lancet Infect Dis. 2011;11(6):471-81.
21. Bakken IJ, Skjeldestad FE, Mjaland O, Johnson E. Cholecystectomy in Norway 1990-2002. Tidsskr Nor Laegeforen. 2004;124(18):2376-8.
22. Daneman N, Ma X, Eng-Chong M, Callery S, Guttmann A. Validation of administrative population-based data sets for the detection of cesarean delivery surgical site infection. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 2011;32(12):1213-5.
23. Leal J, Laupland KB. Validity of electronic surveillance systems: a systematic review. J Hosp Infect. 2008;69(3):220-9.
24. Leth RA, Norgaard M, Uldbjerg N, Thomsen RW, Moller JK. Surveillance of selected post-caesarean infections based on electronic registries: validation study including post-discharge infections. J Hosp Infect. 2010;75(3):200-4.
25. Greene LR, Cain TA, Khoury R, Krystofiak SP, Patrick M, Streed S. APIC position paper: The importance of surveillance technologies in the prevention of health care-associated infections. Am J Infect Control. 2009;37(6):510-3.
26. Bolon MK, Hooper D, Stevenson KB, Greenbaum M, Olsen MA, Herwaldt L, et al. Improved surveillance for surgical site infections after orthopedic implantation procedures: extending applications for automated data. Clin Infect Dis. 2009;48(9):1223-9.
27. Gerbier-Colomban S, Bourjault M, Cetre JC, Baulieux J, Metzger MH. Evaluation study of different strategies for detecting surgical site infections using the hospital information system at Lyon University Hospital. France Ann Surg. 2012;255(5):896-900.
28. Trick WE. Decision making during healthcare-associated infection surveillance: a rationale for automation. Clin Infect Dis. 2013;57(3):434-40.
29. van Mourik MS, Troelstra A, van Solinge WW, Moons KG, Bonten MJ. Automated surveillance for healthcare-associated infections: opportunities for improvement. Clin Infect Dis. 2013;57(1):85-93.
30. Weiskopf NG, Weng C. Methods and dimensions of electronic health record data quality assessment: enabling reuse for clinical research. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2013;20(1):144-51.
31. Yokoe DS, Khan Y, Olsen MA, Hooper DC, Greenbaum M, Vostok J, et al. Enhanced surgical site infection surveillance following hysterectomy, vascular, and colorectal surgery. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 2012;33(8):768-73.
32. Bakken IJ, Suren P, Haberg SE, Cappelen I, Stoltenberg C. The Norwegian patient register--an important source for research. Tidsskr Nor Laegeforen. 2014;134(1):12-3.
33. Calderwood MS, Ma A, Khan YM, Olsen MA, Bratzler DW, Yokoe DS, et al. Use of Medicare diagnosis and procedure codes to improve detection of surgical site infections following hip arthroplasty, knee arthroplasty, and vascular surgery. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 2012;33(1):40-9.
34. Klompas M, Yokoe DS. Automated surveillance of health care-associated infections. Clin Infect Dis. 2009;48(9):1268-75.
35. Wright MO. Automated surveillance and infection control: Toward a better tomorrow. Am J Infect Control. 2008;36(3):S1-6.