» Articles » PMID: 9382378

Assessing Quality Using Administrative Data

Overview
Journal Ann Intern Med
Specialty General Medicine
Date 1998 Feb 12
PMID 9382378
Citations 260
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Administrative data result from administering health care delivery, enrolling members into health insurance plans, and reimbursing for services. The primary producers of administrative data are the federal government, state governments, and private health care insurers. Although the clinical content of administrative data includes only the demographic characteristics and diagnoses of patients and codes for procedures, these data are often used to evaluate the quality of health care. Administrative data are readily available, are inexpensive to acquire, are computer readable, and typically encompass large populations. They have identified startling practice variations across small geographic areas and-supported research about outcomes of care. Many hospital report cards (which compare patient mortality rates) and physician profiles (which compare resource consumption) are derived from administrative data. However, gaps in clinical information and the billing context compromise the ability to derive valid quality appraisals from administrative data. With some exceptions, administrative data allow limited insight into the quality of processes of care, errors of omission or commission, and the appropriateness of care. In addition, questions about the accuracy and completeness of administrative data abound. Current administrative data are probably most useful as screening tools that highlight areas in which quality should be investigated in greater depth. The growing availability of electronic clinical information will change the nature of administrative data in the future, enhancing opportunities for quality measurement.

Citing Articles

Utilisation of a cocreation methodology to develop claims-based indicators for feedback on implementation of comparative effectiveness research results into practice.

de Weerdt V, Willems H, Hofstra G, Repping S, Koolman X, van der Hijden E BMJ Open Qual. 2025; 14(1).

PMID: 40050038 PMC: 11887289. DOI: 10.1136/bmjoq-2023-002542.


Evaluation of the Quality of Results of Lung Cancer Surgery in France Using the PMSI National Database.

Bernard A, Cottenet J, Quantin C Cancers (Basel). 2025; 17(4).

PMID: 40002212 PMC: 11852714. DOI: 10.3390/cancers17040617.


Identifying high-impact-opportunity hospitals for improving healthcare quality based on a national population analysis of inter-hospital variation in mortality, readmissions and prolonged length of stay.

Van Wilder A, Bruyneel L, Cox B, Claessens F, Ridder D, Vanhaecht K BMJ Open. 2025; 15(1):e082489.

PMID: 39788768 PMC: 11751992. DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2023-082489.


Evaluation of the Learning Curve Threshold in Robot-Assisted Lung Cancer Surgery: A Nationwide Population-Based Study.

Pages P, Cottenet J, Madelaine L, Dherissard F, Abou-Hanna H, Bernard A Cancers (Basel). 2025; 16(24.

PMID: 39766120 PMC: 11674775. DOI: 10.3390/cancers16244221.


Esophagectomy Trends and Postoperative Outcomes at Private Equity-Acquired Health Centers.

Williams J, Schaefer S, Jacobs R, Ibrahim A, Odell D JAMA Surg. 2025; 160(3):296-302.

PMID: 39745696 PMC: 11904734. DOI: 10.1001/jamasurg.2024.5920.