Registry Basics

This document, the North Carolina Trauma Registry (NCTR) Data Dictionary, was created using the data dictionary published by the National Trauma Registry of the American College of Surgeons (NTRACS), with modifications specific to the North Carolina Trauma Registry. It is to be used in lieu of the NTRACS data.

It provides a brief summary of every data point used in North Carolina, and notes where there are custom options standard throughout the State. It does not cover those data items that are customized or by each site specifically and not used statewide.

Some data points are not downloaded to the State, i.e., the Central Data Collection Agency. These datapoints are noted with a "d" in the Download Scenario column. Therefore, the statewide registry does not include these data points, although each individual hospital has them.

The column labeled Download Scenario contains information on whether datapoints are to be downloaded to the Central Data Collection Agency (the State) and whether datapoints are sent to the National Trauma Data Bank (NTDB). This column contains one of three values:

• d: This variable is not to be downloaded to the State and is not sent to NTDB
• s: This variable is to be downloaded to the State, but the data are not sent to NTDB
• s,n: This variable is to be downloaded to the State, and may be forwarded to the NTDB.

For the NC Custom Data Points, field type and size information have been included in the Definitions column. The field types are character ( C ), numeric ( N ), and date ( D ) and logic (L). Numeric variables can have decimal places. A numeric variable with a size of 4 with no decimal places would be representative as N4.0. A numeric variable with a size of 4 and 2 decimal places would be represented as N4.2.

The column labeled Datapoint History describes the history of changes to each datapoint and/or discussion, issues, or notes regarding the datapoint. Each change or comment is dated. This column was added in the Jan 2001 version of this data dictionary.

n/a

Background: The main function of a trauma registry is to assess quality assurance and performance improvement (QA/PI) in an individual institution. Non-validated registry data may produce unreliable reports and QA/PI information. This study examines the types of data entry errors in a trauma registry database; the effect of errors on time variable estimates, case ascertainment and statistical measurement; dynamics of error occurrence; and data validation (DV) scheme for a trauma registry.

Methods: Query and cross-tabulation techniques were used to expose a variety of data entry errors. Conceptual aspect for each type of error in DV, especially with respect to QA/PI, is given.

Results: Findings of different errors are provided: out-of-range time values; false positive and false negative errors; errors of commission and omission; duplication errors; errors in demographics; and errors because of inconsistent and incongruent coding. Error rates were less than 3% in commonly occurring data, such as scene time, demographics, hospital discharge and transportation, and greater in less commonly occurring but important data, such as thoracic aorta injury (9.5%) and audit filter for admit Glasgow Coma Scale in emergency department (55.6%). Dynamics of error occurrence that can prevent or minimize errors is described. The main features of a data validation scheme are displayed.

Conclusions: Errors in a trauma registry database cause invalid frequencies, rates, time estimates and statistical measures and affect QA/PI in trauma care. Every functioning trauma registry should develop an on-going program for DV.

Background: Trauma information systems are needed to improve decision making and to identify potential areas of intervention.

Objective: To describe the first year of experience with a trauma registry in two referral centers in southwest Colombia.

Methods: The study was performed in two referral centers in Cali. Patients with traumatic injuries seen between January 1 and December 31, 2012, were included. The collected information included demographics, mechanism of trauma, injury severity score (ISS), and mortality. A descriptive analysis was carried out.

Results: A total of 17,431 patients were registered, of which 67.8% were male with an average age of 30 (±20) years. Workplace injuries were the cause of emergency consultations in 28.2% of cases, and falls were the most common mechanism of trauma (37.3%). Patients with an ISS ≥15 were mostly found in the 18-35-year age range (6.4%). Most patients who suffered a gunshot wound presented an ISS ≥15. A total of 2.5% of all patients died, whereas the mortality rate was 54% among patients with an ISS ≥15 and a gunshot wound.

Conclusion: Once the trauma registry was successfully implemented in two institutions in Cali, the primary causes of admission were identified as falls and workplace injuries. The most severely compromised patients were in the population range between 18 and 35 years of age. The highest mortality was caused by gunshot wounds.

n/a