 |
|
|
|
|
|
Data Sources
Data compiled in the NSW Public Hospitals Comparison Data Book, 1997/98 have been gathered from six sources:
- Department of Health Reporting System (DOHRS);
- Inpatient Statistics Collection (ISC);
- Unaudited Annual Returns submitted by all NSW public hospitals (UAR);
- Hospital Cost Data Collection (HCDC);
- Waiting Times Data Collection (WTDC); and
- Emergency Department Information System (EDIS).
Department of Health Reporting System (DOHRS)
All NSW hospitals submit monthly and quarterly reports on activities, finance and staffing to DOHRS.Inpatient Statistics Collection (ISC)
The ISC covers demographic and episode related data in respect of every inpatient who is separated from all public and private hospitals (including psychiatric hospitals), all public and private day procedure centres, and all public nursing homes in NSW. The ISC is an on-going collection which is managed on a financial year basis.Unaudited Annual Returns (UAR)
The UAR survey covers items which cannot be obtained from operational systems (such as the ISC and DOHRS), and which the Department requires to meet its reporting obligations under the National Health Information Agreement. The 1997/98 reporting year was the second in which collection of UAR data has been undertaken in conjunction with the Hospital Cost Data Collection (HCDC). There was considerable overlap between the two collections, so they were integrated in order to increase the standardisation of the methodology, minimise the reporting burden and to enable more efficient processing of data.Expenditure data collected via the UAR has been used as an interim data source for benchmarking, prior to the availability of the Hospital Cost Data Collection. The UAR is also the source for all financial and staffing measures in this publication.
Hospital Cost Data Collection (HCDC)
The Hospital Cost Data Collection is a survey of the costs of specific hospital services as measured by the AN-DRG classification system for acute inpatients (Appendix 1). It is an annual survey which was first conducted in 1995/96. The HCDC supports the development of benchmark costs for peer hospitals; provides an improved set of acute cost weights for use in resource distribution; provides a currency for inter-Area Service Agreements for patient flows; and provides a mechanism by which the NSW public health system can better understand its cost structures. 1997/98 is the first year of full HCDC incorporation into the NSW Public Hospitals Comparison Data Book.Waiting Times Data Collection (WTDC)
All NSW public hospitals with acute inpatient services are required to submit monthly waiting times data in respect of patients who are booked for elective services (surgical, medical, and obstetric services).Emergency Department Information System (EDIS)
EDIS is a computerised system designed to assist hospitals to manage their Emergency Departments. It was introduced into those public hospitals with the highest volume of emergency activity. During 1997/98 forty nine metropolitan and rural hospitals provided monthly data via EDIS on patients treated.National Survey of Mental Health Services (NSMHS)
The National Survey of Mental Health Services is conducted annually across all Mental Health Services and is accepted as the most accurate source of activity, staffing and finance data available for this service sector. However, due to the need to reconcile the survey with other cost collections, 1997/98 survey data was not available for inclusion in the 1997/98 NSW Public Hospitals Comparison Data Book. In future years data from the NSMHS will be used to produce more meaningful indicators for psychiatric hospitals. Where measures reported in this publication differ from the NSMHS, footnotes should be consulted for an explanation.Quality of Data
There are important improvements in data quality in the 1997/98 edition of the NSW Public Hospital Comparison Data Book which reflect a year long effort at Area Health Service and Health Department levels. NSW Health continues its program to constantly improve the overall quality of data in the various collections with data quality and timeliness measures continuing to be incorporated into the performance contracts between NSW Health and Area Health Service CEOs.Area Health Services have been closely consulted, with five representatives on the Editorial Committee. This ensured Areas had early input into the overall content and layout of the 1997/98 edition.
Area Health Services provide the data for the Data Book for each of their public hospitals. As in previous years data quality varied between the Areas and between collections. A rigorous process of data verification and checking was undertaken with the Areas to improve the quality and resolve inconsistencies.
The preliminary tables of information drawn from the six source data collections were reviewed by the Casemix Area Network which includes Area Health Service staff responsible for casemix issues. The Network members helped identify incomplete, inaccurate and inconsistent information. Their feedback was then incorporated into a second iteration of tables which were further reviewed by the group.
Individual tables of information were then produced on an Area Health Service basis and circulated to Areas for comment. Feedback was then incorporated into the finalised tables.
The Inpatient Statistics Collection is a key data source. This year output editing was conducted throughout the year, in addition to being done at the end of the collection’s processing cycle, resulting in greatly improved data quality from that collection. As in 1996-97 there was no significant under-reporting of data in the ISC for 1997-98.
As with previous years the most substantial data quality issues arose in the Unaudited Annual Return (UAR) where problems arose in reconciling overall expenditures reported in the Audited Financial Statements with the UAR data. The inclusion of data from the Hospital Costs Data Collection has greatly improved the accuracy and reliability of expenditure information.
Data quality issues should still be taken into consideration, especially by readers examining measures relating to costs. If the measures substantially differ from the peer group figures, then readers should review the components of the data which define the measure (for example the breakdown of expenses by program). Where data are known to be deficient, it is indicated as ‘na’ in the tables.
 |
||
 |
||
 |
||
|
||
 |
||