Monday, October 18, 2004 - 3:55 PM
2

Talking to Machines – Comparing Electronic Billing Data to Manually Entered Registry Data

BACKGROUND:
The quality of Registry data is a function of the accuracy and completeness of incoming data. Currently there is disagreement in the Registry field as to the quality of electronic billing data.

OBJECTIVE:
To compare the completeness and accuracy of registry data extracted from provider’s electronic billing data files with data submitted manually.

METHOD:
In a large urban immunization registry, with 300 sites reporting, 140 provider sites were audited by Registry staff, and the immunization histories in patient charts were compared to histories contained in the Registry. Over 20,000 charts of children, 7-35 months of age, were reviewed. UTD rates before and after auditing were calculated for each site. The change in the rates was analyzed by reporting method – electronic or manual. Other factors, such as the size and type of practice, were also taken into account.

RESULT:
Although all reporting sites had missing data, those submitting electronically had less data missing than those reporting manually. The larger practices had better reporting than the smaller practices.

CONCLUSION:
While both manual and electronic reporters had significant amounts of missing data, on the whole, the electronic billing data was better than the manual data. Given the cost saving of not having to re-key all the data, and the efficiencies of uploading electronic data, sites should be encouraged to submit data from their electronic billing system. Problems related to electronic submissions will be discussed.

LEARNING OBJECTIVES:
To identify and understand quality issues inherent in both electronic and manual data submissions.

  Recorded presentation

See more of Understanding Data Quality Issues with Manual and Electronic Provider Data Submissions
See more of The 2004 Immunization Registry Conference