Health Services Information: Patient Safety Research Using Administrative Data

  • Chunliu ZhanEmail author
Reference work entry
Part of the Health Services Research book series (HEALTHSR)


A wide variety of data is routinely collected by healthcare providers, insurers, professional organizations, and government agencies for administrative purposes. Readily available, computer readable, and covering large populations, these data have become valuable resources for patient safety research. A large number of exemplary studies have been conducted that examined the nature and types of patient safety problems, offered valuable insights into the impacts and risk factors, and, to some extent, provided benchmarks for tracking progress in patient safety efforts at local, state, or national levels. Various methods and tools have been developed to aid such research. The main disadvantage lies with the fact these administrative data are often collected without following any research design, protocol, or quality assurance procedure; therefore health services researchers using these data sources must make extra efforts in devising proper methodologies and must interpret their findings with extra caution. As more and more administrative data are collected and digitalized and more tailored methodologies and tools are developed, health services researchers will be presented with ever-greater opportunity to extract valid information and knowledge on patient safety issues from administrative data.


  1. Ackroyd-Stolarz S, Bowles SK, Giffin L. Validating administrative data for the detection of adverse events in older hospitalized patients. Drug Healthc Patient Saf. 2014;13(6):101–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ). 2013 National healthcare quality report. Accessed 1 Sept 2014.
  3. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ). Patient safety indicators. Accessed 1 Sept 2014.
  4. Budnitz DS, Lovegrove MC, Shehab N, et al. Emergency hospitalizations for adverse drug events in older Americans. N Engl J Med. 2011;365(21):2002–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS). CMS data navigator. Accessed 1 Sept 2014.
  6. Dimick JB, Nicholas LH, Ryan AM, et al. Bariatric surgery complications before vs after implementation of a national policy restricting coverage to centers of excellence. JAMA. 2013;309(8):792–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Gandhi T, Kachalia A, Thomas E, et al. Missed and delayed diagnoses in the ambulatory setting: a study of closed malpractice claims. Ann Intern Med. 2006;145:488–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Griffin FA, Resar RK. IHI global trigger tool for measuring adverse events (Second Edition). IHI innovation series white paper. Cambridge, MA: Institute for Healthcare Improvement; 2009.Google Scholar
  9. Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project (HCUP). Accessed 1 Sept 2014.
  10. Iezzoni LI, Daley J, Heeren T, et al. Using administrative data to screen hospitals for high complication rates. Inquiry. 1994;31(1):40–55.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Kohn LT, Corrigan JM, Donaldson M, et al. To err is human: building a safer health system. Washington, DC: Institute of Medicine; 1999.Google Scholar
  12. Owens PL, Barrett ML, Raetzman S, et al. Surgical site infections following ambulatory surgery procedures. JAMA. 2014;311(7):709–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Quan H, Drösler S, Sundararajan V, et al. Adaptation of AHRQ patient safety indicators for use in ICD-10 administrative data by an international consortium. In: Henriksen K, Battles JB, Keyes MA, et al., editors. Advances in patient safety: new directions and alternative approaches. Rockville: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality; 2008.Google Scholar
  14. Raffertya AM, Clarkeb SP, Colesc J, et al. Outcomes of variation in hospital nurse staffing in English hospitals: cross-sectional analysis of survey data and discharge records. Int J Nurs Stud. 2007;44(2):175–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Romano PS, Geppert J, Davies S, et al. A national profile of patient safety in US hospitals based on administrative data. Health Aff. 2003;22(2):154–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Wang X, Hripcsak G, Markatou M, et al. Active computerized pharmacovigilance using natural language processing, statistics and electronic health records: a feasibility studies. JAMIA. 2009;16:328–37.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Zhan C, Miller M. Excess length of stay, costs, and mortality attributable to medical injuries during hospitalization: an administrative data-based analysis. JAMA. 2003;190(4):1868–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Zhan C, Sangl J, Bierman A, et al. Inappropriate medication use in the community-dwelling elderly: findings from 1996 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey. JAMA. 2001;286(22):2823–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Zhan C, Friedman B, Mosso A, et al. Medicare payment for selected adverse events under the prospective payment system: building the business cases for investing in patient safety improvement. Health Aff. 2006;25(5):1386–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Zhan C, Smith SR, Keyes MA, et al. How useful are voluntary medication error reports? The case of warfarin-related medication errors. Joint Comm J Qual Patient Saf. 2008;34(1):36–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Zhan C, Elixhauser A, Richards C, et al. Identification of hospital-acquired catheter-associated urinary tract infections from Medicare claims: sensitivity and positive predictive value. Med Care. 2009;47(3):364–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Health and Human ServicesAgency for Healthcare Research and QualityRockvilleUSA

Personalised recommendations