PubMed Health⌕ Search
Home/Archive/PubMed

PubMed · 9759914

The computerized perinatal database: are the data reliable?

D T Costakos·L A Love·R S Kirby
View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

The purpose of this study is to examine the correctness of the clinical data from the computerized perinatal database (PC-Log) at a Mayo Health System hospital. This computerized database is used for electronic transmission of birth certificates in Wisconsin. The paper medical record is chosen for the comparison. Random selection of 99 charts from a total of 893 births at a tertiary perinatal center during 1995. Of 310 fields in the database, 32 variables were compared to a hand abstraction of the paper medical record. PC-Log had 100% positive-predictive value (PPV) for eclampsia, prolonged rupture of membranes, pre-existing diabetes, cesarean section, and transports. The sensitivity, specificity, and PPV for other variables (abortion, congenital anomalies, gestational diabetes, maternal hypertension, and maternal employment) showed moderate to high agreement, but was poor for maternal ethanol use during pregnancy. Compared to hand abstraction, PC-Log had no recorded cases of substance abuse, antenatal steroids, hyaline membrane disease, circumcision, maternal and infant length of stay. Means for birth weight 5 minute Apgar scores did not differ, and the correlations were r = 0.982 and r = 0.960. The PC-Log showed good agreement for many but not all the variables of clinical interest.

Explore related subjects

Birth CertificatesFemaleHumansInfant, NewbornMedical Records Systems, ComputerizedPerinatal CarePregnancyRandom AllocationSensitivity and SpecificityWisconsinJournal ArticleResearch Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

D T Costakos, L A Love, R S Kirby. 1998. The computerized perinatal database: are the data reliable?. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-2007-993974

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

PubMed1999

Why race is differentially classified on U.S. birth and infant death certificates: an examination of two hypotheses.

Among U.S. infants who die within a year of birth, classification of race on birth and death certificates may differ. I investigate two hypotheses: (1) The race of infants of different-race parents is more likely to be differentially classified at birth and death than the race of infants of same-race parents. (2) States with a greater proportion of infant deaths of a given race are less likely to differentially classify infants of that race on birth and death certificates than states with a smaller proportion of infant deaths of that race. Using the Linked Birth/Infant Death data tape for 1983-1985, I assessed the first hypothesis by comparing rates of differential classification for infants with different-race parents and same-race parents. To assess the second hypothesis, I examined the correlations between the proportion of infant deaths of each race in each state and the proportion of infants of that race consistently classified. Differential racial classification on birth and death certificates was more than 31 times as likely with different-race than with same-race parents. The second hypothesis was confirmed for white, black, American Indian, and Japanese infants. As the U.S. population becomes more heterogeneous, attention to these methodologic issues becomes increasingly critical for the measurement and redress of differential racial health status.

Birth Certificates↗
PubMed1999

Vital records for quality improvement.

The birth certificate and death certificate are important sources of population-based data for assessing the extent of risk and the quality of perinatal outcome. The birth certificate contains the hospital of birth and many items, such as birth weight and race, that can serve as important risk adjusters for neonatal mortality. To assess mortality a second vital record, the death certificate, must be linked to the birth certificate. If the analysis is to be stratified by level of neonatal care or other hospital characteristics, a third file providing these details must also be utilized. The exact vital record formats, recording protocols, and quality control efforts are determined by and differ across each state. Even with these differences, the quality and completeness of vital records and their linkage are reasonable for population-based analyses. Although the most important vital outcome from a neonatologist's perspective is neonatal mortality, vital records can also be used to assess fetal, perinatal, postneonatal, and infant mortality. The analytic paradigm that is used in quality analysis performed on data derived from the vital record states that observed outcome is a function of risk, chance, and care. Risk is a characteristic or condition such as low birth weight or low 1-minute Apgar score that elevates the probability of an adverse outcome but is beyond the control of the agent responsible for the outcome. Using risk matrices or regression analysis one determines the expected mortality for a specific institution's case-mix. This expectation is usually based on the statewide analysis of infants with a similar risk profile. A standardized mortality ratio is calculated by dividing observed by expected mortality. A hospital with a high observed mortality (12 deaths per 1000) and an even higher expected mortality based on the risk characteristics of its neonates (24 per 1000) would have a standardized mortality ratio of 0.5. Once the effects of chance have been accounted for by statistical testing this finding could indicate that mortality in this hospital is 50% lower then expected. Although initially intended for legal and broad-based public health purposes, vital records represent an important source of data to inform perinatal quality improvement activities. The optimal usefulness of information derived from vital records requires that clinicians take an active role in assuring that data entry is complete and accurately reflects risk status, clinical factors, and outcomes. However, even a superb database will be of limited usefulness unless it is linked to an initiative that actively involves clinicians committed to quality improvement.

Birth Certificates↗