Riley M, Halliday J
Victorian Perinatal Data Collection Unit, Melbourne.
Health Inf Manag. 1998 Mar-May;28(1):13-5. doi: 10.1177/183335839802800109.
The aim of this study was to compare the quality of the reporting and coding of eclampsia in two routine data collections: the Victorian Inpatient Minimum Database (VIMD) and the Perinatal Data Collection Unit (PDCU). The validity of cases in the two data sets was confirmed by reference to the original medical record data. Only 12 cases were the same in both data sets (i.e., 35.3% agreement). There were an additional 51 cases that were reported to either one or the other of the data sets and, of these, only 15 (i.e., 29%) were confirmed as eclampsia. The overall number of cases confirmed for both systems in 1995 was 27, or 0.4 per 1000 confinements. Reasons for these discrepancies were investigated and three basic problems identified: quality of documentation in the medical record, coding errors, and use of data from computer-generated forms. Neither the VIMD nor the PDCU was regarded as having sufficiently accurate data for adequate reporting of maternal morbidity. By combining the information from both databases a better estimate of incidence can be obtained, but improved reporting and coding is essential for accurate assessment of this condition.
维多利亚州住院患者最小数据库（VIMD）和围产期数据收集单位（PDCU）。通过参考原始病历数据确认了两个数据集中病例的有效性。两个数据集中只有12例相同（即一致性为35.3%）。另外有51例报告在其中一个数据集中，其中只有15例（即29%）被确认为子痫。1995年两个系统确认的病例总数为27例，即每1000例分娩中有0.4例。对这些差异的原因进行了调查，并确定了三个基本问题：病历记录质量、编码错误以及使用计算机生成表格中的数据。VIMD和PDCU都未被认为具有足够准确的数据来充分报告孕产妇发病率。通过结合两个数据库的信息可以获得更好的发病率估计，但改进报告和编码对于准确评估这种情况至关重要。
