Tuesday, October 28, 2003 - 2:30 PM
3740

This presentation is part of C4: Registries As Tools for Provider Quality Assurance and Clinic Assessment

Using the Registry to Conduct WinCASA Assessments: Lessons Learned

Wendy Wang1, Anne Cordon2, Mark H. Sawyer1, Kathe Gustafson3, Michelle Deguire1, and Sandy Ross3. (1) San Diego Immunization Partnership, UC San Diego, Community Pediatrics, 9500 Gilman Drive, MC 0927, La Jolla, CA, USA, (2) San Diego Immunization Program, County of San Diego Health and Human Services Agency, PO Box 85222, Mail Stop P511B, 3851 Rosecrans Street, San Diego, CA, USA, (3) Immunization Program, County of San Diego Health and Human Services Agency, P.O. Box 85222, San Diego, CA, USA


KEYWORDS:
Immunization Registry, WinCASA, Assessment, Public Clinics

BACKGROUND:
The San Diego Immunization Program has conducted CASA assessments of the County’s 49 public clinics for 11 years. It was an intensive manual process that required pulling charts and entering the data into WinCASA for analysis. This process has been revolutionized by the development and utilization of the countywide immunization registry. Integrating data from the registry has been found to be both beneficial and challenging.

OBJECTIVE:
Ensure the quality of immunization assessment after integrating the information from the registry.

METHOD:
Population and sample selection were determined using billing data. When the registry generated immunization dates, it was merged with billing data electronically, and then imported to WinCASA. A list of patients with uncompleted immunization histories or no information in the registry was generated from WinCASA and sent to each clinic to follow-up for additional information on immunization and MOGE status. Coverage rates were compared before and after the update.

RESULT:
For the 2002 audits, assessors had to pull 37% of the charts and input the data into WinCASA. The coverage of 4-DTP, 3-Polio and 1-MMR was 65% based on the information from the registry, and 79% after the follow-up process. The 2003 audit is currently in process. With the improvement in quality of registry data, a smaller percentage of difference between the registry-based assessment and the result of the follow-up is anticipated

CONCLUSION:
Data integration and management were challenging, however, the savings in staff time and energy are tremendous after integrating use of the registry into the CASA assessment process.

LEARNING OBJECTIVES:
Describe the process and effort required in converting from a manual CASA assessment to an audit using data through registry.

Handout (.ppt format, 183.0 kb)

Back to Registries As Tools for Provider Quality Assurance and Clinic Assessment
Back to The 2003 Immunization Registry Conference (October 27-29, 2003)