4.6 Article

Protocol and pilot data for establishing the Australian Stroke Clinical Registry

期刊

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF STROKE
卷 5, 期 3, 页码 217-226

出版社

WILEY-BLACKWELL
DOI: 10.1111/j.1747-4949.2010.00430.x

关键词

health outcome; quality assessment; registries; stroke

资金

  1. ACSQHC [018/0809]
  2. Allergan Australia

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background Disease registries assist with clinical practice improvement. The Australian Stroke Clinical Registry aims to provide national, prospective, systematic data on processes and outcomes for stroke. We describe the methods of establishment and initial experience of operation. Methods Australian Stroke Clinical Registry conforms to new national operating principles and technical standards for clinical quality registers. Features include: online data capture from acute public and private hospital sites; opt-out consent; expert consensus agreed core minimum dataset with standard definitions; outcomes assessed at 3 months poststroke; formal governance oversight; and formative evaluations for improvements. Results Qualitative feedback from sites indicates that the web-tool is simple to use and the user manuals, data dictionary, and training are appropriate. However, sites desire automated data-entry methods for routine demography variables and the opt-out consent protocol has sometimes been problematic. Data from 204 patients (median age 71 years, 54% males, 60% Australian) were collected from four pilot hospitals from June to October 2009 (mean, 50 cases per month) including ischaemic stroke (in 72%), intracerebral haemorrhage (16%), transient ischaemic attack (9%), and undetermined (3%), with only one case opting out. Conclusion Australian Stroke Clinical Registry has been well established, but further refinements and broad roll-out are required before realising its potential of improving patient care through clinician feedback and allowance of local, national, and international comparative data.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据