Priorities for trauma quality improvement and registry use in Australia and New Zealand

Authors

Kate A. Curtis, University of WollongongFollow
Belinda Gabbe, Monash University
Ramon Shaban, University of Sydney
Shizar Nahidi, University of Sydney
Cliff Pollard, Royal Australasian College of Surgeons
Kirsten Vallmuur, Royal Brisbane & Women's Hospital
Katherine Martin, Royal Australasian College of Surgeons
Grant Christey, University of Auckland

RIS ID

139619

Publication Details

Curtis, K., Gabbe, B., Shaban, R. Z., Nahidi, S., Pollard, C., Vallmuur, K., Martin, K. & Christey, G. (2020). Priorities for trauma quality improvement and registry use in Australia and New Zealand. Injury: International Journal of the Care of the Injured, 51 (1), 84-90.

Abstract

Introduction: The Australia New Zealand Trauma Registry enables the collection and analysis of standardised data about trauma patients and their care for quality improvement, injury prevention and benchmarking. Little is known, however, about the needs of providers and clinicians in relation to these data, or their views on trauma quality improvement priorities. As clinical experts, trauma clinicians should have input to these as ultimately their practice may be influenced by report findings. This paper presents the perspectives of multidisciplinary trauma care professionals in Australia and New Zealand about the use of the Australia New Zealand Trauma Registry data and trauma quality improvement priorities. Methods: An exploratory survey of trauma professionals from relevant Australia and New Zealand professional organisations was conducted using the Snowballing Method between September 2018 and February 2019. Participants were recruited via a non-random sampling technique to complete an online survey. Descriptive statistical and content analyses were conducted. Results: The data use priorities identified by 102 trauma professionals from a range of locations participated were clinical improvement and system/process improvement (86.3%). Participants reported that access to trauma data should primarily be for clinicians (93.1%) and researchers (87.3%). Having a standardised approach to review trauma cases across hospitals was a priority in trauma quality improvement. Conclusion: Trauma registry data are under-utilised and their use to drive clinical improvement and system/process improvement is fundamental to trauma quality improvement in Australia and New Zealand.