The Danish neonatal clinical database is valuable for epidemiologic research in respiratory disease in preterm infants

BMC Pediatrics

Finn Ebbesen¹  Tine Brink Henriksen²  Jesper Padkær Petersen²  Sofia Andersson¹ 

[1] Department of Paediatrics, Aalborg University Hospital, Reberbansgade, DK 9000 Aalborg, Denmark;Department of Paediatrics, Aarhus University Hospital, Skejby, Brendstrupgårdsvej 100, DK 8200 Aarhus N, Denmark

关键词: Quality assurance;    Epidemiology;    Validation;    Very preterm infants;    Respiratory variables;   

Others  :  1139005
DOI  :  10.1186/1471-2431-14-47

 received in 2013-04-13, accepted in 2014-01-16,  发布年份 2014

【 摘 要 】

Background

We examined the quality of the information on the use of surfactant and the use of and duration of nasal continuous positive airway pressure (nCPAP), oxygen supplementation, and mechanical ventilation in the Danish Neonatal Clinical Database (NeoBase).

Methods

We included all neonates born with a gestational age < 32 weeks admitted to a Neonatal Intensive Care Unit (NICU) at two university hospitals in 2005. On discharge, the clinicians complete a structured form with information related to the delivery and course of stay in the NICU. These forms were entered into the NeoBase. The nurses’ daily bedside documentation was used as reference standard. Concordance was used as a measure of agreement between the NeoBase and the reference standard. For the dichotomous variables the concordance was defined as the sensitivity of the information registered in the NeoBase. For the continuous variables, it was based on the discrepancy in days between the NeoBase and the reference standard. The percentage of concordance was described as high (> 90), moderate (70–90) or low (< 70).

Results

Overall, 153 infants participated in the study. Concordance was high for all dichotomous variables. The NeoBase slightly underestimated the duration of nCPAP and mechanical ventilation. The duration of oxygen therapy was neither over- nor underestimated in the NeoBase. Concordance was low for all continuous variables if we assumed that the registered information was identical. It was 100% for duration of mechanical ventilation and moderate for nCPAP and oxygen supplementation if we allowed for a discrepancy of 1 day.

Conclusion

The NeoBase is a valuable tool for clinical and epidemiologic research and quality assurance regarding neonatal respiratory disease.

【 授权许可】

   
2014 Andersson et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

【 图 表 】

Figure 1.

Figure 2.

Figure 3.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Network TIN: The CRIB (clinical risk index for babies) score: a tool for assessing initial neonatal risk and comparing performance of neonatal intensive care units. Lancet 1993, 342:193-198.
• [2]Parry G, Tucker J, Tarnow-Mordi W: CRIB II: an update of the clinical risk index for babies score. The Lancet 2003, 361:1789-1791.
• [3]Greenough A, Milner A: Acute respiratory disease. In Roberton’s Textbook of Neonatalogy. 4th edition. Edited by Rennie J. Churchill Livingstone: Elsevier; 2005:468-470.
• [4]Garne E, Grytter C: Epidemiology, morbidity and mortality for infants with a gestational age of 24-31 weeks. Ugeskr Laeger 2010, 172:519-524.
• [5]Hansen AK, Wisborg K, Uldbjerg N, Henriksen TB: Risk of respiratory morbidity in term infants delivered by elective caesarean section: cohort study. BMJ 2008, 336:85-87.
• [6]Hearst N, Hulley S: Using secondary data. In Designing Clinical Research. 1st edition. Baltimore: Williams and Wilkins; 1988:53-62.
• [7]Andersen TF, Madsen M, Jørgensen J, Mellemkjoer L, Olsen JH: The danish national hospital register. A valuable source of data for modern health sciences. Dan Med Bul 1999, 46:263-268.
• [8]Sorensen HT, Sabroe S, Olsen J: A framework for evaluation of secondary data sources for epidemiological research. Int J Epidemiol 1996, 25:435-442.
• [9]Vestergaard M, Obel C, Henriksen TB, Christensen J, Madsen KM, Østergaard JR, Olsen J: The danish national hospital register is a valuable study base for epidemiologic research in febrile seizures. J Clin Epidemiol 2006, 59:61-66.
• [10]Lynge E, Sandegaard J, Rebolj M: The danish national patient register. Scand J Public Health 2011, 39:30-33.
• [11]Kristensen J, Langhoff-Roos J, Skovgaard LT, Kristensen FB: Validation of the danish birth registration. J Clin Epidemiol 1996, 49:893-897.