华南预防医学 ›› 2016, Vol. 42 ›› Issue (4): 338-343.doi: 10.13217/j.scjpm.2016.0338

• 论著 • 上一篇    下一篇

广东省区域卫生信息平台门诊数据质量分析

徐勇1,吴伟彬1,伍水平2,张媚1,李胜峰1   

  1. 陇南市疾病预防控制中心,甘肃 陇南 746000
  • 收稿日期:2016-04-02 出版日期:2016-08-20 发布日期:2016-10-24
  • 作者简介:徐勇(1966―),男,硕士研究生,副主任医师,主要从事信息管理工作

Analysis of clinic data quality in regional health information platform in Guangdong Province

XU Yong1, WU Wei-bin1, WU Shui-ping2, ZHANG Mei1, LI Sheng-feng1   

  1. 3.Shenzhen Center for Disease Control and Prevention
  • Received:2016-04-02 Online:2016-08-20 Published:2016-10-24
  • Contact: 广东省科技计划项目(2013B040401009);广东省医学科学技术研究项目(WSTJJ20130422440105196612182439)

摘要: 目的了解广东省区域卫生信息平台医院门诊数据质量,并筛选出数据质量好的医院作进一步研究,探索提高区域卫生信息平台数据质量的方法与途径。方法抽取广东省G市和F市区域卫生信息平台中28家医院2012―2014年的门诊数据,采用多维量化评估和综合评分2种方法对数据质量进行分析。结果多维量化评估结果显示,G市10家医院数据上传率为23.18%~100.00%, F市18家医院数据上传率为14.96%~100.00%。G市和F市医院的数据填充率最高分别为73.18%和82.20%,最低分别为46.53%和55.26%。G市和F市数据规范率最高分别为88.38%和93.69%,最低分别为33.10%和60.48%。G市和F市数据逻辑正确率最高分别为99.44%和92.71%,最低分别为43.50%和67.54%。G市和F市数据可用率最高分别为91.55%和77.66%,最低分别为49.93%和55.18%。G市和F市医院数据质量综合评分最高分别为83.59和89.28分,最低分别为53.20和54.82分,平均分分别为69.59和77.52分。结论所调查的医院卫生信息平台总体数据质量尚可,部分医院数据质量有待提高,建议区域卫生信息平台建设必须将疾控工作的需求列入建设内容。

Abstract: ObjectiveTo understand the quality of data from hospital clinics in the regional health information platform (RHIP) in Guangdong Province and screen out hospitals with better quality of the data for further research, so as to explore approaches to improve the quality of the data in RHIP. MethodsOutpatient service data of 28 hospitals in cities of F and G were extracted from RHIP in Guangdong Province from 2012 to 2014. The data quality was analyzed by multi-dimensional quantitative evaluation and comprehensive scoring approach.ResultsMulti-dimensional quantitative evaluation showed that the data upload rates were 23.18% - 100.00% for 10 hospitals in G city and 14.96% - 100.00% for 18 hospitals in F city. The highest data fill rates were 73.18% and 82.20%, and the lowest ones, 46.53% and 55.26% in cities G and F, respectively. The highest normative compliance rates were 88.38% and 93.69%, and the lowest ones, 33.10% and 60.48% in cities of G and F, respectively. For the logical correctness of the data, the highest rates were 99.44% and 92.71%, and the lowest rates were 43.50% and 67.54% in cities G and F, respectively. The highest availability rates were 91.55% and 77.66%, and the lowest ones, 49.93% and 55.18% in cities of G and F, respectively. The highest comprehensive scores of the data quality for hospitals were 83.59 and 89.28, the lowest scores were 53.20 and 54.82, and the average scores were 69.59 and 77.52 in cities of G and F, respectively. ConclusionThe data quality in RHIP was acceptable for most of the hospitals, but needs to be improved for some hospitals. Requirements for disease control and prevention should be included in the construction of RHIP.

中图分类号: 

  • R195