+ Site Statistics
+ Search Articles
+ PDF Full Text Service
How our service works
Request PDF Full Text
+ Follow Us
Follow on Facebook
Follow on Twitter
Follow on LinkedIn
+ Subscribe to Site Feeds
Most Shared
PDF Full Text
+ Translate
+ Recently Requested

Patient safety measures in burn care: do National reporting systems accurately reflect quality of burn care?

Patient safety measures in burn care: do National reporting systems accurately reflect quality of burn care?

Journal of Burn Care and Research 31(1): 125-129

Recently, much attention has been placed on quality of care metrics and patient safety. Groups such as the University Health-System Consortium (UHC) collect and review patient safety data, monitor healthcare facilities, and often report data using mortality and complication rates as outcomes. The purpose of this study was to analyze the UHC database to determine if it differentiates quality of care across burn centers. We reviewed UHC clinical database (CDB) fields and available data from 2006 to 2008 for the burn product line. Based on the September 2008 American Burn Association (ABA) list of verified burn centers, we categorized centers as American Burn Association-verified burn centers, self-identified burn centers, and other centers that are not burn units but admit some burn patients. We compared total burn admissions, risk pool, complication rates, and mortality rates. Overall mortality was compared between the UHC and National Burn Repository. The UHC CDB provides fields for number of admissions, % intensive care unit admission, risk pool, length of stay, complication profiles, and mortality index. The overall numbers of burn patients in the database for the study period included 17,740 patients admitted to verified burn centers (mean 631 admissions/burn center/yr or per 2 years), 10,834 for self-identified burn centers (mean 437 admissions/burn center/yr or per 2 years), and 1,487 for other centers (mean 11.5 admissions/burn center/yr or per 2 years). Reported complication rates for verified burn centers (21.6%), self-identified burn centers (21.3%), and others (20%) were similar. Mortality rates were highest for self-identified burn centers (3.06%), less for verified centers (2.88%), and lowest for other centers (0.74%). However, these outcomes data may be misleading, because the risk pool criteria do not include burn-specific risk factors, and the inability to adjust for injury severity prevents rigorous comparison across centers. Databases such as the UHC CDB provide a potential to benchmark quality of care. However, reporting quality data for trauma and burns requires stringent understanding of injury data collection. Although quality measures are important for improving patient safety and establishing benchmarks for complication and mortality rates, caution must be taken when applying them to specific product lines.

Please choose payment method:

(PDF emailed within 0-6 h: $19.90)

Accession: 054889812

Download citation: RISBibTeXText

PMID: 20061847

DOI: 10.1097/bcr.0b013e3181cb8d00

Related references

Patient Safety Measures in Burn Care: Do National Reporting Systems Accurately Reflect Quality of Burn Care?. Yearbook of Surgery 2011: 68-69, 2011

Examining national burn care policies--is the Israeli burn care alignment based on national data?. Journal of Burn Care and Research 33(4): 510-517, 2012

Evidence-based burn care--An assessment of the methodological quality of research published in burn care journals from 1982 to 2008. Burns 36(8): 1190-1195, 2011

American Burn Association Committee on the Organization and Delivery of Burn Care: Burn Care Outcomes and Clinical Indicators. Journal of Burn Care & Rehabilitation 17(2): 17a-39a, 1996

The development and validation of the CARe Burn Scale - Adult Form: a Patient Reported Outcome Measure (PROM) to assess quality of life for adults living with a burn injury. Journal of Burn Care and Research 2019, 2019

Burn injury models of care: A review of quality and cultural safety for care of Indigenous children. Burns 44(3): 665-677, 2017

How patients enter the burn care system is changing: a glimmer from the National Burn Repository. Journal of Burn Care & Research 28(2): 220-221, 2007

National Burn Awareness Week: how are burn care facilities in the United States participating?. Journal of Burn Care & Rehabilitation 14(5): 578-580, 1993

Assessing health-care providers' readiness for reporting quality and patient safety indicators at primary health-care centres in Lebanon: a national cross-sectional survey. Human Resources for Health 13: 37, 2016

Evaluation of burn care utilizing a national burn registry. Emergency Medical Services 7(6): 107-14, 116-7, 1978

Growth rings of a tree: progression of burn care charges abstracted from a decade of the National Burn Repository. Journal of Burn Care & Research 28(5): 659-660, 2007

Nursing Care of the Burn-Injured Patient R B Trofino F A Davis Nursing Care of the Burn-Injured Patient 466pp £33-50 0-8036-8658-7 [Formula: see text. Nursing Standard 1987) 6(1): 48-48, 1991

Burn dressings: a critical indicator for patient care classification in burn units. Military Medicine 156(12): 654-657, 1991

The diabetic burn patient--Experience of the burn intensive care unit Vienna. Burns 43(6): 1359-1360, 2017

Emergency Care of The Burn Patient Before The Burn Center: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Journal of Burn Care and Research 2018, 2018