Coordination of data between collectors

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.

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).

Use the "generate email" button to communicate this information to the next/previous collector.

Similarly, use the "generate email" button to send notifications about any identified VAPs/CLIs to the Quality Officer and Managers. See Contacting Quality Officer and Manager for VAPs and CLIs.

Items not to be Communicated

Admit, acquired or comorbid codes do not need to be communicated, aside from the ones mentioned above.

It is no longer necessary to coordinate transfer times when patients move from one collection location to another.

Follow the regular collection instructions as outlined in:

• Dispo DtTm
• Arrive DtTm

Reasons why remaining collection should be done independently

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:

1. 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.
2. 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.
3. 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.