Dataset Information

How well does the minimum data set measure healthcare use? a validation study.

ABSTRACT:

Background

To improve care, planners require accurate information about nursing home (NH) residents and their healthcare use. We evaluated how accurately measures of resident user status and healthcare use were captured in the Minimum Data Set (MDS) versus administrative data.

Methods

This retrospective observational cohort study was conducted on all NH residents (N = 8832) from Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada, between April 1, 2011 and March 31, 2013. Six study measures exist. NH user status (newly admitted NH residents, those who transferred from one NH to another, and those who died) was measured using both MDS and administrative data. Rates of in-patient hospitalizations, emergency department (ED) visits without subsequent hospitalization, and physician examinations were also measured in each data source. We calculated the sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values (PPV, NPV), and overall agreement (kappa, κ) of each measure as captured by MDS using administrative data as the reference source. Also for each measure, logistic regression tested if the level of disagreement between data systems was associated with resident age and sex plus NH owner-operator status.

Results

MDS accurately identified newly admitted residents (κ = 0.97), those who transferred between NHs (κ = 0.90), and those who died (κ = 0.95). Measures of healthcare use were captured less accurately by MDS, with high levels of both under-reporting and false positives (e.g., for in-patient hospitalizations sensitivity = 0.58, PPV = 0.45), and moderate overall agreement levels (e.g., κ = 0.39 for ED visits). Disagreement was sometimes greater for younger males, and for residents living in for-profit NHs.

Conclusions

MDS can be used as a stand-alone tool to accurately capture basic measures of NH use (admission, transfer, and death), and by proxy NH length of stay. As compared to administrative data, MDS does not accurately capture NH resident healthcare use. Research investigating these and other healthcare transitions by NH residents requires a combination of the MDS and administrative data systems.

SUBMITTER: Doupe MB

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5896092 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND: over the last 25 years several national registries of CF have been set up. Such systems can be very useful in providing an integrated resource for improving patient care and conducting research on the disease. Minimum Data Set is a common set of data items that should be used to collect and report data in the registry. The principal aim of this research was to determine minimum data set for the CF registry in north-west of Iran. METHODS: data items collected by several selected registries of cystic fibrosis were studied and an initial set of data was selected by the researchers. A group of experts including epidemiologists, pediatricians, and CF specialists were asked to review the proposed data elements and score them based on their importance by using a nine-point Likert scale. The items scored as important or highly important by more than 50 % of the experts, were included in final list of minimum data set. Availability of data was evaluated through reviewing medical records of 144 patients hospitalized in Children Hospital located in Tabriz. RESULTS: overall six classes of data (46 items) were identified in the selected registry systems for cystic fibrosis: patient demographics, administrative data, survival status, diagnostic procedures, genetic and clinical manifestations, and therapeutics. Thirty two data elements from all six categories of data were approved by the experts as the minimum data set for cystic fibrosis registry system. Availability of data in administrative category and survival class was 100 percent. Collecting data on medications was feasible in 100% of the cases as well. In class of demographic data, accessibility of patient name, age, gender, place of birth, and date of birth was 100 percent. In group of diagnostic procedures, partial availability of data was found for sweat test and genetic test. No data was found on the antenatal screening, exercise tolerance test, and glucose tolerance test. CONCLUSION: this work can be considered as a first step toward establishing CF registry system in Iran. Minimum data set can be also useful in designing electronic registry or electronic patient records for those suffering from CF toward integration of their fragmented records across continuum of the health care system in order to improve quality of shared patient care.

Project description:BackgroundThe minimum data set (MDS) is a collection of data elements to be grouped using a standard approach to allow the use of data for clinical and research purposes. Health data are typically voluminous, complex, and sometimes too ambiguous to generate indicators that can provide knowledge and information on health. This complexity extends further to the rare disease (RD) domain. MDSs are essential for health surveillance as they help provide services and generate recommended population indicators. There is a bottleneck in international literature that reveals a global problem with data collection, recording, and structuring in RD.ObjectiveThis study aimed to identify and analyze the MDSs used for RD in health care networks worldwide and compare them with World Health Organization (WHO) guidelines.MethodsThe population, concept, and context methodology proposed by the Joanna Briggs Institute was used to define the research question of this systematic review. A total of 4 databases were reviewed, and all the processes were reported using the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) methodology. The data elements were analyzed, extracted, and organized into 10 categories according to WHO digital health guidelines. The quality assessment used the STROBE (Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology) checklist.ResultsWe included 20 studies in our review, 70% (n=14) of which focused on a specific health domain and 30% (n=6) of which referred to RD in general. WHO recommends that health systems and networks use standard terminology to exchange data, information, knowledge, and intelligence in health. However, there was a lack of terminological standardization of the concepts in MDSs. Moreover, the selected studies did not follow the same standard structure for classifying the data from their MDSs. All studies presented MDSs with limitations or restrictions because they covered only a specific RD, or their scope of application was restricted to a specific context or geographic region. Data science methods and clinical experience were used to design, structure, and recommend a fundamental global MDS for RD patient records in health care networks.ConclusionsOur study highlights the difficulties in standardizing and categorizing findings from MDSs for RD because of the varying structures used in different studies. The fundamental RD MDS designed in this study comprehensively covers the data needs in the clinical and management sectors. These results can help public policy makers support other aspects of their policies. We highlight the potential of our results to help strategic decisions related to RD.Trial registrationPROSPERO CRD42021221593; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=221593.International registered report identifier (irrid)RR2-10.1016/j.procs.2021.12.034.

Project description:BackgroundThe Resident Assessment Instrument-Minimum Data Set (RAI-MDS) 2.0 is designed to collect the minimum amount of data to guide care planning and monitoring for residents in long-term care settings. These data have been used to compute indicators of care quality. Use of the quality indicators to inform quality improvement initiatives is contingent upon the validity and reliability of the indicators. The purpose of this review was to systematically examine published and grey research reports in order to assess the state of the science regarding the validity and reliability of the RAI-MDS 2.0 Quality Indicators (QIs).MethodsWe systematically reviewed the evidence for the validity and reliability of the RAI-MDS 2.0 QIs. A comprehensive literature search identified relevant original research published, in English, prior to December 2008. Fourteen articles and one report examining the validity and/or reliability of the RAI-MDS 2.0 QIs were included.ResultsThe studies fell into two broad categories, those that examined individual quality indicators and those that examined multiple indicators. All studies were conducted in the United States and included from one to a total of 209 facilities. The number of residents included in the studies ranged from 109 to 5758. One study conducted under research conditions examined 38 chronic care QIs, of which strong evidence for the validity of 12 of the QIs was found. In response to these findings, the 12 QIs were recommended for public reporting purposes. However, a number of observational studies (n = 13), conducted in "real world" conditions, have tested the validity and/or reliability of individual QIs, with mixed results. Ten QIs have been studied in this manner, including falls, depression, depression without treatment, urinary incontinence, urinary tract infections, weight loss, bedfast, restraint, pressure ulcer, and pain. These studies have revealed the potential for systematic bias in reporting, with under-reporting of some indicators and over-reporting of others.ConclusionEvidence for the reliability and validity of the RAI-MDS QIs remains inconclusive. The QIs provide a useful tool for quality monitoring and to inform quality improvement programs and initiatives. However, caution should be exercised when interpreting the QI results and other sources of evidence of the quality of care processes should be considered in conjunction with QI results.