Impact of clinical registries on quality of patient care and health outcomes: Protocol for a systematic review

BMJ Open

Volumn 6, Issue 4, 2016, Pages

  Hoque, Dewan Md Emdadul ^a,b   Kumari, Varuni ^a   Ruseckaite, Rasa ^a   Romero, Lorena ^c   Evans, Sue M ^a  

^a MONASH UNIVERSITY   (Australia)

^b INTERNATIONAL CENTRE FOR DIARRHOEAL DISEASE RESEARCH   (Bangladesh)

^c AMREPAlfred   (Australia)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK; HEALTH CARE COST; HEALTH CARE QUALITY; HEALTH CARE UTILIZATION; HUMAN; MORTALITY; PATIENT CARE; PATIENT PREFERENCE; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; REGISTER; REVIEW; SURVIVAL; SYSTEMATIC REVIEW (TOPIC); EVIDENCE BASED MEDICINE; HEALTH CARE DELIVERY; HOSPITALIZATION; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; STANDARDS; STATISTICS AND NUMERICAL DATA;

DELIVERY OF HEALTH CARE; EVIDENCE-BASED MEDICINE; HOSPITALIZATION; HUMANS; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT (HEALTH CARE); PATIENT CARE; REGISTRIES;

EID: 84970006561     PISSN: None     EISSN: 20446055     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2015-010654     Document Type: Review

References (32)

1. Swedish Health Care, Improved Results in Healthcare Using Quality Registries (cited 11 March 2015). http://www.swedishhealthcare.com/improved-results-in-healthcare-using-quality-registries.
2. Arts DG, De Keizer NF, Scheffer GJ. Defining and improving data quality in medical registries: A literature review, case study, and generic framework. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2002;9:600-11.
3. Miquel Porta JM. A dictionary of epidemiology. 5th edn. Oxford University Press, 2008.
4. Evans SM, Scott IA, Johnson NP, et al. Development of clinical-quality registries in Australia: The way forward. Med J Aust 2011;194:360-3.
5. Gliklich RE, Dreyer NA, Leavy MB. Registries for Evaluating Patient Outcomes: A users guide, 3rd Edition. Agency for Health Care Research and Quality, 2014.
6. Guidelines for the conduct of registry based studies using the EBMT database. 2015 (cited 30 October 2015). http://www.ebmt.org/Contents/Data-Management/Documents/GuidelinesConductRegistryStudies.pdf.
7. Pollard C, Bailey KA, Petitte T, et al. Electronic patient registries improve diabetes care and clinical outcomes in rural community health centers. J Rural Health 2009;25:77-84.
8. Sehgal A, Davies E. Lessons from developing and running a clinical database for colorectal cancer. J Eval Clin Pract 2006;12:94-101.
9. Spertus JA, Peterson E, Rumsfeld JS, et al. Cardiovascular Outcomes Research Consortium. The Prospective Registry Evaluating Myocardial Infarction: Events and Recovery (PREMIER) -evaluating the impact of myocardial infarction on patient outcomes. Am Heart J 2006;151:589-97.
10. Brieger D, Aliprandi-Costa B. Developments in procedural and disease registries: A focus on coronary artery disease. Curr Opin Cardiol 2013;28:405-10.
11. Lundström M. Literature review report on Quality Registries (cited 30 October 2015). http://www.eurequo.org/downloads/EUREQUO.pdf.
12. Stey AM, Russell MM, Ko CY, et al. Clinical registries and quality measurement in surgery: A systematic review. Surgery 2015;157:381-95.
13. Emilsson L, Lindahl B, Köster M, et al. Review of 103 Swedish healthcare quality registries. J Intern Med 2015;277:94-136.
14. Australian Clinical Registries, Clinical Registries (cited 13 October 2015). http://clinicalregistries.com.au/clinical-registries/.
15. Hills NK, Johnston SC. Duration of hospital participation in a nationwide stroke registry is associated with improved quality of care. BMC Neurol 2006;6:20.
16. Ferguson TBJr, Peterson ED, Coombs LP, et al., Society of Thoracic Surgeons and the National Cardiac Database. Use of continuous quality improvement to increase use of process measures in patients undergoing coronary artery bypass graft surgery: A randomized controlled trial. JAMA. 2003;290:49-56.
17. Oien RF, Forssell HW. Ulcer healing time and antibiotic treatment before and after the introduction of the Registry of Ulcer Treatment: An improvement project in a national quality registry in Sweden. BMJ Open 2013;3:e003091.
18. Measurements for improved quality in health care in Australia by Swedish Agency for Growth Policy Analysis. 2013 (cited 12 March 2015). http://www.tillvaxtanalys.se/download/18.5f097bc113eacc3d6d5133/1369032981940/direct-response-2013-05.pdf.
19. Solomon DJ, Henry RC, Hogan JG, et al. Evaluation and implementation of public health registries. Public Health Rep 1991;106:142-50.
20. Valsecchi MG, Steliarova-Foucher E. Cancer registration in developing countries: luxury or necessity? Lancet Oncol 2008;9:159-67.
21. Han W, Sharman R, Heider A, et al. Impact of electronic diabetes registry 'Meaningful Use' on quality of care and hospital utilization. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2016;23:242-7.
22. Larsson S, Lawyer P, Garellick G, et al. Use of 13 disease registries in 5 countries demonstrates the potential to use outcome data to improve health care's value. Health Aff (Millwood) 2012;31:220-7.
23. Finlay A, Cosovich C, Gebur S. A national disease registry moves beyond clinical impact, fostering measurable cost savings at the community hospital level. J Health Care Finance 1999;27:8-29.
24. Julian PT, Higgins SG. The Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. 2011 (cited 30 October 2015). http://handbook.cochrane.org/.
25. Madhok R. Crossing the quality chasm: lessons from health care quality improvement efforts in England. Proc (Bayl Univ Med Cent) 2002;15:77-83.
26. Cochrane data abstraction form (cited 16 February 2015). http://epoc.cochrane.org/epoc-specific-resources-review-authors.
27. Black N, Barker M, Payne M. Cross sectional survey of multicentre clinical databases in the United Kingdom. BMJ 2004;328:1478.
28. Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network for RCT, Cohort and Case Control studies (cited 24 February 2015). http://www.sign.ac.uk/methodology/checklists.html.
29. Higgins JPT, Green S. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. Version 5.1.0. The Cochrane Collaboration, 2011.
30. Free C, Phillips G, Felix L, et al. The effectiveness of M-health technologies for improving health and health services: A systematic review protocol. BMC Res Notes 2010;3:250.
31. Jakobsen E, Green A, Oesterlind K, et al. Nationwide quality improvement in lung cancer care: The role of the Danish Lung Cancer Group and Registry. J Thorac Oncol 2013;8:1238-47.
32. Lilford R, Mohammed MA, Spiegelhalter D, et al. Use and misuse of process and outcome data in managing performance of acute medical care: Avoiding institutional stigma. Lancet 2004;363:1147-54.