|
GENERAL ASPECTS
|
|
Background information
|
|
Site link
|
http://www.anzba.org.au/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=47&Itemid=104
|
|
Acronym
|
ANZBA Bi-NBR
|
|
Date last updated
|
April 2007
|
|
Background information
|
Australian and New Zealand Burns Association (ANZBA) Bi-National Burns Registry established 2003 at Alfred Burns unit, from 2008, collaborative with DEPM. National benchmarking & quality activities in burns management in Australia and New Zealand, and facilitate multicentre research projects. The Bi-National Burns Registry is data repository capturing information about adult & paediatric patients with new burn injuries admitted to all Australian and New Zealand burns units. The aims of the registry are to: describe the epidemiology of burn injuries & inform the development of burn injury prevention strategies in Australia and New Zealand; to monitor the type & quality of burn care management; to establish the clinical outcomes of burn patients; to improve service planning; to develop best practice clinical guidelines initiatives, and to benchmark performance indicators on a state, national and international level.
|
|
Reference population
|
|
What is the common circumstance that determines inclusion in the registry
|
All patients admitted to a Burns Unit with any burn
|
|
What geographical area is covered by the registry
|
Sixteen burns units in Australia have been recruited; 9 currently
contributing data
|
|
Which group, if any, is not represented in the registry yet ought to be?
|
Seven hospitals in Australia have burns units but are not currently submitting data.
|
|
|
|
DATA SET
|
|
Content
|
|
Date in which data was first collected
|
1/03/2005
|
|
Number of individuals/ episodes of care included in the registry
|
1780 individuals
|
|
Date in which this was determined
|
1/01/2007
|
|
How is data collected?
|
Paper-based reporting
|
|
What variables are included in the registry
|
Identifier_condition or intervention_short term outcome or long term outcome
|
|
What proportion of the eligible population is included in the database – how complete is the dataset?
|
Unknown or few (<80%)
|
|
If the registry documents management of patients, for what periods of time are individuals followed up?
|
No
|
|
Data dictionary
|
|
|
Data linkage
|
|
To which other database is linkage routinely undertaken
|
|
|
If nationally approved codes are used to identify the subject, clinician or institution, what is link key?
|
Hospital identifier
|
|
Security
|
|
How are records stored on the database?
|
Reversibily anonymised
|
|
Consent
|
|
Have subjects given consent for data collection?
|
Subjects informed individually of data collection and use to which it will be put
|
|
What is the level to which subjects have consented?
|
Opt off- Signed consent not obtained but option to be removed from registry
|
|
|
|
OUTPUTS
|
|
Analysis
|
|
What is the primary outcome collected by the registry?
|
|
|
Is there any bias associated with the outcome due to the way in which it was reported?
|
Observer neither independent nor blinded to the intervention
|
|
How and when was completeness of the registry last determined?
|
|
|
Publication
|
|
|
|
|
GOVERNANCE
|
|
Is the registry endorsed by any clinical/professional association?
|
Australian and New Zealand Burns Association
|
|
Was a Steering Committee established when the registry was developed?
|
Yes
|
|
Is a Management Committee supporting the registry?
|
No
|
|
How often does the Management Committee meet?
|
|
|
Have Terms of Reference been established with reporting processes to address issues?
|
No
|
|
What is the source of funding for the registry?
|
Public sector(DHS/Uni)
|
