Validating the British Columbia Perinatal Data Registry: a chart re-abstraction study

BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth

Lily Lee²  Cathe Johnson²  Brooke Kinniburgh²  KS Joseph¹  Jennifer Hutcheon¹  Gillian Frosst² 

[1] School of Population and Public Health, University of British Columbia, 2206 East Mall, Vancouver V6T 1Z3British Columbia, Canada;Perinatal Services BC, West Tower, 3rd Floor, 555 West 12th Avenue, Vancouver V5Z 3X7British Columbia, Canada

关键词: Epidemiology;    Data collection;    Validation studies;    Pregnancy;    Perinatal care;   

Others  :  1206401
DOI  :  10.1186/s12884-015-0563-7

 received in 2014-11-27, accepted in 2015-05-18,  发布年份 2015

【 摘 要 】

Background

The British Columbia Perinatal Data Registry (BCPDR) contains individual-level obstetrical and neonatal medical chart data for virtually all births occurring in British Columbia, Canada. The objective of this study was to assess the validity of information in the BCPDR by performing a provincial chart re-abstraction study.

Methods

A two-stage stratified clustered sampling design was employed. Obstetrical facilities were stratified based on geographic location and obstetrical volume. Charts of mothers and newborns with a length of stay of five or more days or transfer to another facility following the delivery were oversampled. A total of 85 maternal and 32 newborn variables were assessed for completeness (percent completion) and validity (sensitivity and specificity for categorical variables, intra-class correlation coefficient [ICC] for continuous variables).

Results

1,084 maternal and 1,142 newborn charts were abstracted. Mandatory variables such as primary indication for induction and primary indication for cesarean delivery were 100 % complete. Some variables such as pre-pregnancy weight were relatively more complete in the re-abstraction as compared with the BCPDR (83.0 % vs 76.8 %; p < 0.001). The validity of key surveillance variables was high (e.g., HIV screening completed [sensitivity 98.0 %, 95 % confidence interval (CI) 97.0–98.8 %; specificity 72.3 %, 95 % CI 60.8–81.9 %], induction of labour [sensitivity 93.9 %, 95 % CI 90.2–96.5 %; specificity 98.7 %, 95 % CI 97.7–99.3 %], primary elective cesarean delivery [sensitivity 96.0 %, 95 % CI 83.8–99.7 %; specificity 99.8 %, 95 % CI 99.4–100.0 %], gestational age from newborn examination [ICC 0.99, 95 % CI 0.99–0.99]). Examples of variables with lower validity included total admissions prior to delivery episode, maternal smoking status, and timing of breastfeeding initiation.

Conclusion

Many important clinical and population health variables in the BCPDR had excellent validity. Some key variables warrant strengthening through improved definitions, system changes, and abstractor training.

【 授权许可】

   
2015 Frosst et al.; licensee BioMed Central.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Provincial Health Services Authority: Perinatal Services BC. [http://www.phsa.ca/AgenciesAndServices/Agencies/perinatalservicesbc.htm].
• [2]Perinatal Services BC: Data registry. [http://www.perinatalservicesbc.ca/DataAndSurveillance/DataRegistry/default.htm].
• [3]Grzybowski S, Stoll K, Kornelsen J. The outcomes of perinatal surgical services in rural British Columbia: a population-based study. Can J Rural Med. 2013; 18(4):123-9.
• [4]Marquette GP, Hutcheon JA, Lee L. Predicting the spontaneous onset of labour in post-date pregnancies: a population-based retrospective cohort study. J Obstet Gynaecol Can. 2014; 36(5):391-9.
• [5]Mehrabadi A, Hutcheon JA, Lee L, Kramer MS, Liston RM, Joseph KS. Epidemiological investigation of a temporal increase in atonic postpartum haemorrhage: a population-based retrospective cohort study. BJOG. 2013; 120(7):853-62.
• [6]Bell JC, Ford JB, Cameron CA, Roberts CL. The accuracy of population health data for monitoring trends and outcomes among women with diabetes in pregnancy. Diabetes Res Clin Pract. 2008; 81(1):105-9.
• [7]Bradford HM, Cárdenas V, Camacho-Carr K, Lydon-Rochelle MT. Accuracy of birth certificate and hospital discharge data: a certified nurse-midwife and physician comparison. Matern Child Health J. 2007; 11(6):540-8.
• [8]Reeves MJ, Mullard AJ, Wehner S. Inter-rater reliability of data elements from a prototype of the Paul Cloverdell National Acute Stroke Registry. BMC. 2008; 8:19. BioMed Central Full Text
• [9]MacIntyre E, Linnegar M, Lencar C, Brauer M, Demers P, Ostry A. Perinatal Database Registry Chart Abstraction Validation Report. University of British Columbia, Vancouver (BC); 2006.
• [10]Canada S. Survey Methods and Practices. Minister of Industry, Ottawa; 2010.
• [11]Scott A.Rao-Scott Corrections and Their Impact [INTERNET]. https://www.amstat.org/sections/srms/proceedings/y2007/Files/JSM2007-000874.pdf . Available from: [https:/ / www.amstat.org/ sections/ srms/ proceedings/ y2007/ Files/ JSM2007-000874.pdf] Proceedings of the Survey Research Methods Section, ASA.
• [12]Butt K, Lim K. Determination of gestational age by ultrasound. J Obstet Gynaecol Can. 2014; 36(2):171-181.
• [13]Perinatal Services BC. British Columbia Perinatal Data Registry Reference Manual, Version 6.0. Vancouver (BC), Perinatal Services BC; 2008.
• [14]Perinatal Services BC. Spotlight on presentation and position. PSBC Bull. 2011; 4(3):5.
• [15]Perinatal Services BC: Validation of the indications for cesarean delivery in the British Columbia Perinatal Data Registry: A Perinatal Services BC Surveillance Special Report. 2012 Apr;1(5):10. http://www.perinatalservicesbc.ca/NR/rdonlyres/984D523C-75E6-4663-8375-9E3BA72E0D2B/0/SurveillanceSpecialReportsValidationforCesareanDeliveryApril2012.pdf
• [16]British Columbia Perinatal Data Registry Reference Manual, Version 6.01. Perinatal Services BC, Vancouver (BC); 2014.
• [17]Dunn S, Bottomley J, Ali A, Walker M. 2008 Niday Perinatal Database quality audit: report of a quality assurance project. Chronic Dis Inj Can. 2011; 32(1):32-42.
• [18]CIHI Data Quality Study of the 2009-2010 Discharge Abstract Database. CIHI, Ottawa (ON); 2012.
• [19]Joseph KS, Fahey J. Validation of perinatal data in the Discharge Abstract Database of the Canadian Institute for Health Information. Chronic Dis Can. 2009; 29(3):96-100.