Chaos in command

Trauma leaders are poised for transformation as factors challenging data integrity mount in the most urgent environments.

A difficult standard

Standardization is not frequently found within trauma data programs. While verification is a voluntary and standardized process, center designations are inconsistent across states which creates inequity from one Level III trauma center data set to another. Add to this issue, the fact that trauma data management is predominantly a manual process.

Data-defined best practices in trauma care delivery is more difficult than it appears—and that’s saying something.

Our trauma expertise

American Trauma Society Trauma Registry

Level I, II, III, IV

Added risk to data integrity

In light of the lack of automation in trauma program technology, certified trauma registrars (CTRs) are required to do more. It’s no coincidence that turnover in CTRs is common. Thirty-five percent of trauma program leaders reported issues with retention of staff. As a result, requirements for the role are waning. In a recent survey, one-third of trauma program leaders required a high school diploma for their CTRs, most offered educational benefits to allow them to obtain their CTR.

The reduced expertise results in even greater risk to data fidelity.

Added risk to data integrity
Grady Health System record closure
Case study

Grady Health System record closure

Record Closure Rate Did Not Meet the ACS Standard:

  • 955 of the 1,653 records abstracted in-house were completed within 60 days of patient discharge, yielding a concurrency rate of 58% (Figure 1)
  • Concurrency rate fell short of the 80% required by the ACS to define the registry as “concurrent”

Outcomes after Q-Centrix Partnership:

  • Utilizing a partner: 1,522 of the 1,592 records were completed within 60 days of patient discharge, yielding a concurrency rate of 95%
  • Concurrency rate improved to 94% within the first month of record the project and ranged from 93-100% for the remainder of the analysis period
  • Exceeded the 80% required by the ACS to be considered a “concurrent registry”
Read the Case Study

How we work

Q-Centrix offers a comprehensive approach to trauma Level I, II, III, and IV data management including a team of expert CTRs and industry-leading quality assurance protocols that ensure meaningful, high-fidelity, complete and secure data for data-driven care decisions.

Data is input into the EHR
Experts analyze the data for accuracy
Exceptions are reported on our dashboard
Experts analyze the reports to identify insights for process improvement

Q-Centrix experts

Jelena Virijevic

Senior Vice President, Client Services

Deanna Waldrop

Senior Director, Client Services

Eric Crites

Vice President, Enterprise Services