监测绩效和改善结果:澳大利亚临床登记的特点和产出。

Susannah Ahern, Mohammad Amin Honardoost, Aruna Kartik, Eliza Chung, Lachlan Dalli, Tesfahun C Eshetie, Cindy Turner, Michelle Merenda, Stephen McDonald
{"title":"监测绩效和改善结果:澳大利亚临床登记的特点和产出。","authors":"Susannah Ahern, Mohammad Amin Honardoost, Aruna Kartik, Eliza Chung, Lachlan Dalli, Tesfahun C Eshetie, Cindy Turner, Michelle Merenda, Stephen McDonald","doi":"10.1177/18333583251345039","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Background:</b> Clinical registries are long-term observational data collections relating to specific medical conditions, procedures, devices or health services. <b>Objective:</b> To assess current characteristics and outputs of clinical registries in Australia. <b>Method:</b> A cross-sectional survey design of Australian clinical registries listed on the Australian Commission on Safety and Quality in Health Care (ACSQHC) register as of 21 September 2023. <b>Results:</b> Of 107 clinical registries on the ACSQHC register that were contacted, 64 (60%) participated in the survey. Of these, 37 (58%) had been active for ⩾10 years, 38 (59%) were medical clinical registries and 35 (57%) received government funding. Clinical registry activities included research (92%), quality improvement (81%) and epidemiological monitoring (68%). Data were commonly patient-identifiable (64%) and collected by clinicians/staff (81%). A majority (55%) had real-time data available to contributing hospitals. Clinical registry outputs included providing data to researchers (97%), publications (83%), annual reports (69%) and site benchmarked reports (64%). Over half informed quality improvement activities (60%), monitored adherence to guidelines (59%) or informed policy or service planning (52%). Nearly half-supported clinical trials (49%), while one-fifth had integrated with government data frameworks. <b>Conclusion:</b> Australian clinical registries monitor health system performance across a breadth of clinical areas. A majority undertake regular public and hospital reporting and inform other quality improvement activities. <b>Implications for health information management practice:</b> Clinical registries interact with hospitals regarding their data collection and reporting activities. Health information management specialists have an important role in maximising registry data quality and therefore value to a wide variety of stakeholders.</p>","PeriodicalId":73210,"journal":{"name":"Health information management : journal of the Health Information Management Association of Australia","volume":" ","pages":"18333583251345039"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Monitoring performance and improving outcomes: characteristics and outputs of Australian clinical registries.\",\"authors\":\"Susannah Ahern, Mohammad Amin Honardoost, Aruna Kartik, Eliza Chung, Lachlan Dalli, Tesfahun C Eshetie, Cindy Turner, Michelle Merenda, Stephen McDonald\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/18333583251345039\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p><b>Background:</b> Clinical registries are long-term observational data collections relating to specific medical conditions, procedures, devices or health services. <b>Objective:</b> To assess current characteristics and outputs of clinical registries in Australia. <b>Method:</b> A cross-sectional survey design of Australian clinical registries listed on the Australian Commission on Safety and Quality in Health Care (ACSQHC) register as of 21 September 2023. <b>Results:</b> Of 107 clinical registries on the ACSQHC register that were contacted, 64 (60%) participated in the survey. Of these, 37 (58%) had been active for ⩾10 years, 38 (59%) were medical clinical registries and 35 (57%) received government funding. Clinical registry activities included research (92%), quality improvement (81%) and epidemiological monitoring (68%). Data were commonly patient-identifiable (64%) and collected by clinicians/staff (81%). A majority (55%) had real-time data available to contributing hospitals. Clinical registry outputs included providing data to researchers (97%), publications (83%), annual reports (69%) and site benchmarked reports (64%). Over half informed quality improvement activities (60%), monitored adherence to guidelines (59%) or informed policy or service planning (52%). Nearly half-supported clinical trials (49%), while one-fifth had integrated with government data frameworks. <b>Conclusion:</b> Australian clinical registries monitor health system performance across a breadth of clinical areas. A majority undertake regular public and hospital reporting and inform other quality improvement activities. <b>Implications for health information management practice:</b> Clinical registries interact with hospitals regarding their data collection and reporting activities. Health information management specialists have an important role in maximising registry data quality and therefore value to a wide variety of stakeholders.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":73210,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Health information management : journal of the Health Information Management Association of Australia\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"18333583251345039\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-06-26\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Health information management : journal of the Health Information Management Association of Australia\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/18333583251345039\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health information management : journal of the Health Information Management Association of Australia","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/18333583251345039","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:临床登记是与特定医疗条件、程序、设备或卫生服务有关的长期观察数据收集。目的:评估澳大利亚临床登记的当前特征和输出。方法:对截至2023年9月21日在澳大利亚卫生保健安全和质量委员会(ACSQHC)注册的澳大利亚临床登记处进行横断面调查设计。结果:在接触的107个ACSQHC注册的临床注册中心中,64个(60%)参与了调查。其中,37个(58%)在小于10年的时间内活跃,38个(59%)是医疗临床登记处,35个(57%)获得了政府资助。临床登记活动包括研究(92%)、质量改进(81%)和流行病学监测(68%)。数据通常是患者可识别的(64%),由临床医生/工作人员收集(81%)。大多数(55%)向提供服务的医院提供实时数据。临床注册输出包括向研究人员提供数据(97%)、出版物(83%)、年度报告(69%)和现场基准报告(64%)。超过一半的人告知质量改进活动(60%),监测指导方针的遵守情况(59%)或告知政策或服务计划(52%)。近一半的人(49%)支持临床试验,而五分之一的人与政府数据框架进行了整合。结论:澳大利亚临床登记监测卫生系统的性能跨越临床领域的广度。大多数机构承担定期的公共和医院报告,并通知其他质量改进活动。对卫生信息管理实践的影响:临床登记处与医院就其数据收集和报告活动进行互动。卫生信息管理专家在最大限度地提高注册表数据质量方面发挥着重要作用,因此对各种利益攸关方都有价值。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Monitoring performance and improving outcomes: characteristics and outputs of Australian clinical registries.

Background: Clinical registries are long-term observational data collections relating to specific medical conditions, procedures, devices or health services. Objective: To assess current characteristics and outputs of clinical registries in Australia. Method: A cross-sectional survey design of Australian clinical registries listed on the Australian Commission on Safety and Quality in Health Care (ACSQHC) register as of 21 September 2023. Results: Of 107 clinical registries on the ACSQHC register that were contacted, 64 (60%) participated in the survey. Of these, 37 (58%) had been active for ⩾10 years, 38 (59%) were medical clinical registries and 35 (57%) received government funding. Clinical registry activities included research (92%), quality improvement (81%) and epidemiological monitoring (68%). Data were commonly patient-identifiable (64%) and collected by clinicians/staff (81%). A majority (55%) had real-time data available to contributing hospitals. Clinical registry outputs included providing data to researchers (97%), publications (83%), annual reports (69%) and site benchmarked reports (64%). Over half informed quality improvement activities (60%), monitored adherence to guidelines (59%) or informed policy or service planning (52%). Nearly half-supported clinical trials (49%), while one-fifth had integrated with government data frameworks. Conclusion: Australian clinical registries monitor health system performance across a breadth of clinical areas. A majority undertake regular public and hospital reporting and inform other quality improvement activities. Implications for health information management practice: Clinical registries interact with hospitals regarding their data collection and reporting activities. Health information management specialists have an important role in maximising registry data quality and therefore value to a wide variety of stakeholders.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信