“…Accurate data that can be effectively accessed and used are vital to improving the quality and safety of outcomes in health care 1 . This statement can be applied to any area of health, including the short‐, intermediate‐ and long‐term sequelae for women suffering from the hypertensive disorders of pregnancy (HDP).…”
Current database systems are unreliable for recording maternal medical conditions, such as hypertension, and accuracy can only be assured with the use of a disorder-specific database, such as the HDPDB.
“…Accurate data that can be effectively accessed and used are vital to improving the quality and safety of outcomes in health care 1 . This statement can be applied to any area of health, including the short‐, intermediate‐ and long‐term sequelae for women suffering from the hypertensive disorders of pregnancy (HDP).…”
Current database systems are unreliable for recording maternal medical conditions, such as hypertension, and accuracy can only be assured with the use of a disorder-specific database, such as the HDPDB.
“…The major works quantifying the scale of adverse events are now ten years old, and yet progress has been slow in using this information to improve patient safety (Institute of Medicine 1999). It has been argued that tolerance of risk by the community and those working in the health system is too high (Smyth 2002). The events in Macarthur provide a powerful incentive to correct this situation.…”
Recent investigations into the Macarthur Health Service have resulted in multiple reviews of a small number of cases. This article was prompted by a casual observation that these reviews have resulted in differing conclusions about what occurred in each case and what might have been done in response. The reliability of peer review is examined, together with the literature on the scale of adverse events and the issue of problem identification. Potential sources of bias and error during peer review are considered. Drawing on the lessons from the literature and the experience of Macarthur, suggestions are made to improve the identification and review of adverse events.
“…1 The implementation of casemix in Australia can be traced back to the demonstration projects in the mid 1980s, and over a decade has passed since the earliest implementations of casemix-based funding in Victoria and South Australia. It is timely then to consider the progress we have made and to ask whether we are using the casemix tool in the best way.…”
Section: Aust Health Rev 2007: 31 Suppl 1: S59-s67mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…There is much more that can be done in the quality area by using the available data rather than waiting for it to improve. 1 It may be argued that evidence is needed of the use of casemix information in making clinical decisions transparent and accountable before we can say that we are using the information to its full potential. However, there is a paucity of literature on this topic, perhaps because of a reluctance to publish sensitive information.…”
What is known about the topic?While Australia has become a world leader in the design and production of casemix groupers and the underlying clinical classification system, the use of casemix information at the grass roots level is still limited to mainly administrative and managerial staff. What does this paper add? This paper suggests that there is still scope for further development in the use of casemix information in the clinical domain, suggesting that maturity will be achieved when the casemix data and the hospital discharge data on which they are based are used routinely to underpin a wide range of clinical issues including quality of care and safety issues.
What are the implications for practitioners?There is a need for greater engagement of clinicians to enhance the use of casemix data in clinical decision making.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.