CCMDB Wiki

Coordination of data between collectors: Difference between revisions

 
m Text replacement - "[[Category: " to "[[Category:"
 
(17 intermediate revisions by 5 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{discussion}}
This page provides a guideline about how much information should be communicated between collectors, when patients are transferred from one collection unit/service to another.  
At some point it was identified that comorbids can be inaccurate due to poor transfer of information between locations. To solve this, collectors were told to compare comorbids between each other. This is adding a lot of overhead work in emailing or calling each other.  


At the [[Team Meeting September 29 2010]] we discussed that we should stop comparing comorbids across locations. Julie would be able to assume that any comorbid mentioned during a hospital session is active for the rest of that stay, so having collectors spend time to make sure it is recorded at each collection is duplication.


We also talked about [[Changes#Facilitate_exchange_of_patient_discharge_times | facilitating how collectors communicate admit/discharge times]]. I need to know if we can drop the comorbid comparisons before I can implement that. Trish, can we stop comparing comorbids? Please also update [[Changes#Facilitate_exchange_of_patient_discharge_times | here]]. [[User:Ttenbergen|Ttenbergen]] 11:37, 2 November 2010 (CDT)
== Items to be Communicated ==
Information related to:
* [[CAP-Community Acquired Pneumonia]] vs [[VAP - Ventilator Associated Pneumonia]] vs [[HAP-Hospital Acquired Pneumonia]]
* [[Central Line Related Blood stream Infection (CLR-BSI)]]
* Results of cultured [[Pathogens]] that become available ''after'' a patient moves to another unit (see also [[Lab and culture reports]]).


*{{discussion}}This topic was discussed at the steering committee meeting on October 3, 2011.  It was the consensus of the group that comparing comorbids is generally not necessary.  However, if a data collector needs to contact another in regards to comparing organisms later cultured or if they are unclear how to code the diagnosis and need to clarify some items from a transferred pt anyway, it does not hurt to compare the comorbids.  The time comparisons can be obtained by using the Transfer Tracker.mdb.  --[[User:LKolesar|LKolesar]] 14:35, 26 October 2011 (CDT)
Use the [["generate email" button]] to communicate this information to the next/previous collector.  
** No more Transfer Tracker.mdb. How will this impact these instructions, what should people do now? Ttenbergen 16:42, 2017 June 21 (CDT)


* Trish says: collectors should communicate with each other across hospitals.
== Items not to be Communicated ==
* Dr. Roberts: if you consistently find more stuff than the local doc wrote down, notify so that the doctor can be talked to.  
Admit, acquired or comorbid codes do not need to be communicated, aside from the ones mentioned above.


{{discussion}}
It is not necessary to coordinate transfer times when patients move from one collection location to another.
Can I summarize the above as:
* Dr. Roberts: if you consistently find more stuff than the local doc wrote down, notify so that the doctor can be talked to.
* {{discussion}} '''What?''' can help with comparison of admit/discharge dates
* Data collectors should continue to compare comorbidities across hospitals
** if this last part is true, what should we maybe add to the Transfer Tracker to reduce requirement to contact each other? {{discussion}} [[User:Ttenbergen|Ttenbergen]] 14:45, 2012 September 5 (CDT)
*** or, nowadays to [["email collector about patient data" button]]. but that seems excessive PHIA in email... Ttenbergen 16:43, 2017 June 21 (CDT)


[[Category: Standards and Conventions]]
== Reasons why remaining collection should be done independently ==
[[Category: Data Collection Guide]]
Data collection should be done independently for diagnosis and comorbids.
For patients who moved from one unit or ward to another unit and ward, it is essential that collection of diagnosis and comorbids must be done independently by the data collector of each unit for the following reasons:
 
# Comprehensiveness/Completeness of data  - We would like to collect as much information as possible about the patient’s status/condition. If more than one person collects data on the same patient independently, the items missed/overlooked by one person may be recorded by another.
# A measure of precision or repeatability – In scientific methodology, a measurement process is considered valid if it is accurate and precise.  A measure of precision is related to the degree by which repeated measurements under unchanged conditions will show the same results.  We are interested to know the degree of ‘same ‘or ‘different’ results our measurement process has. In the past we did a peer audit, but did not have the chance to continue since then for various reasons. We have the opportunity to do this currently in selective data (e.g. diagnosis and comorbids) and particularly for the group of patients who stayed in  more than ward/unit during a hospital stay. It must be emphasized that this measure cannot be determined if data is just being transferred from one person to another.
# Review and standardization of the process – there is also an opportunity to investigate the causes of discrepancies, if any, and improve the collection guidelines and process.
 
== Related Articles ==
{{Related Articles}}
 
[[Category:Data Collection Guide]]
[[Category:Standards and Conventions]]
Retrieved from "https://ccmdb.kuality.ca/index.php?title=Coordination_of_data_between_collectors"