Lyons C, Gumpert R
Brighton Health Authority, Brighton General Hospital, Brighton.
BMJ. 1990 Jun 16;300(6739):1563-6. doi: 10.1136/bmj.300.6739.1563.
To assess the meaningfulness of a year's worth of audit data relating to all the inpatients of one consultant general surgeon and to question the usefulness of certain outcome measures.
Analysis of records entered on to audit computer (Dunnfile) and relating to inpatient episodes for one consultant general surgeon over one year. Data obtained were compared with ward records and the patient administration system to check their accuracy.
The three hospitals and 12 wards in Brighton health district where the surgeon admitted patients.
859 Records relating to inpatient episodes from 1 January to 31 December 1988. These covered 655 main procedures and 79 secondary procedures performed at the same time.
Procedures were analysed by complexity of operation (BUPA code) and grade of surgeon; complications were counted and rates constructed by surgeon and by BUPA code: returns to theatre were analysed.
Simple counts revealed some data, such as the fact that one registrar performed more major operations (32) than the senior registrars (22 and 14), and an analysis of complications showed that he had a lower complication rate (11.4% v 20.0% and 19.4%). But the simple complication rate disclosed nothing about whether the complication was avoidable. Likewise, the number of returns to theatre needed further qualification. Analysis of data collection for February to April 1988 showed a 30% deficit of information on the audit system compared with ward records and prompted a re-examination of everyone's role in collecting data. After the year's audit there was still a 17% shortfall compared with the district's patient administration system, though some of this was accounted for by a backlog of work.
It is difficult to ensure adequate data collection and entails everyone in an unfamiliar discipline. Connecting the audit system to the patient administration system would help. Despite the limitations of crude analyses of workload and complications rates, the audit data helped to measure activity and in the management of the firm. Nevertheless, time and care have to be taken in presenting and interpreting audit data carefully.
Counting is not enough.
评估与一位普通外科顾问医生的所有住院患者相关的一整年审计数据的意义,并质疑某些结果指标的有用性。
分析录入审计计算机(邓恩文件)的记录,这些记录与一位普通外科顾问医生在一年中的住院病例相关。将获得的数据与病房记录和患者管理系统进行比较,以检查其准确性。
布莱顿健康区的三家医院和12个病房,该外科医生在此收治患者。
1988年1月1日至12月31日期间与住院病例相关的859条记录。这些记录涵盖了655例主要手术和同时进行的79例次要手术。
根据手术复杂性(保柏代码)和外科医生级别分析手术;统计并发症数量,并按外科医生和保柏代码计算发生率;分析返回手术室的情况。
简单计数显示了一些数据,例如一名住院医生进行的大手术(32例)比高级住院医生(分别为22例和14例)多,对并发症的分析表明他的并发症发生率较低(11.4%对20.0%和19.4%)。但简单的并发症发生率并未揭示并发症是否可避免。同样,返回手术室的次数需要进一步限定。对1988年2月至4月数据收集的分析显示,与病房记录相比,审计系统的信息缺失30%,这促使重新审视每个人在数据收集方面的作用。经过一年的审计,与该地区的患者管理系统相比,仍有17%的短缺,不过其中一些是由于工作积压造成的。
难以确保充分的数据收集,这需要不熟悉该领域的每个人参与。将审计系统与患者管理系统连接会有所帮助。尽管对工作量和并发症发生率的粗略分析存在局限性,但审计数据有助于衡量活动情况并用于科室管理。然而,在仔细呈现和解释审计数据时必须花费时间并谨慎对待。
仅仅计数是不够的。