Download Health data in Ontario

Survey
yes no Was this document useful for you?
   Thank you for your participation!

* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project

Document related concepts
no text concepts found
Transcript
Health data
in Ontario
Susan Bondy,
U. of Toronto Dalla Lana School of Public Health
Presented at:
Health Over the Life Course , Pre-conference Workshop
University of Western Ontario, October 14, 2009
[email protected]
Data sources
• Health surveys,
– Federal, Provincial, sub-provincial
•
•
•
•
Vital statistics data
National hospitalization data (CIHI)
Provincial health system data
Special disease registries, etc.
Health Surveys
• Ontario Health Surveys
– Custom in 1990; NPHS/CCHS buy-ins
• Rapid Risk Factor Surveillance System
(RRFSS)
• Ongoing thematic surveys, e.g.,
– CAMH OSDUHS (school survey since 1977)
and Adult “Monitor” surveys
Recipient data and linkage
• Registered Persons Data Base (RPDB)
– ‘accounts-level’ records for Ontario Health
Insurance Plan beneficiaries
– OHIN linkable to services funded by Province
– Not a registry of population, but of accounts
• E.g., death clearance is not aggressive
• Some research centres have created cleaner
versions
Hospital data
• All Ontario hospitals participate in CIHI
databases
– Emergency care, rehab. since 2000-2003
– Mental health facilities ~2005
• CCAC (home care) data system ~2005
• High quality data with patient, disease,
and care elements
Drug data
• Ontario Drug Benefits Plan:
– Residents over 65
• Fact and quantity in data
• Not dose, co-morbidity (or, necessarily, indication)
– If dispensed in hospital, or special cancer
drugs program
• Paid for; not necessarily in data
– Prescription drugs for <65 year olds
• Need-based provision (“Trillium Program”)
• For individual-level data, rely on self-report surveys
Drug data
• Some special drugs (tracked via…)
– Hospital-based dispensaries
– Government-controlled access
– Service fees for drug administration
– Clinical care electronic data
– All these examples apply to medical oncology
– Gaps for other patient groups
Ambulatory care / services
• Procedures and maneuvers in hospitals
observed via CIHI data
– Procedure codes
– Diagnostic data in same complex record
• Claims (billings) to OHIP for services by
registered providers (physicians and
others, e.g., physiotherapists)
“OHIP” data (i.e., claims data)
• Limited data on patient
– One diagnosis code (variation on ICD)
• Many opportunities for misclassification error
• Very little info. on context or intent
• What done, without why.
• Procedure codes of interest
– May be highly informative
• Specific to disease, purpose and provider
– May not exist as desired
• E.g., Pap. for screening (part of periodic exam; separate
billing only for diagnostic test)
– May be under-utilized
“OHIP” data (claims data)
• Increasing number and size of non-fee-forservices pockets
• Shadow-billings system supposed to
capture procedures
• Preventive services may be provided
(tracked) separately
– E.g., Provincial cancer screening programs,
other preventive programs (flu shot)
Special disease and treatment
registries (just a few examples)
•
•
•
•
•
Ontario Cancer Registry (OCR)
Ontario Familial Colon Cancer Registry
Ontario Trauma Registry
Ontario Diabetes Registry
Systemic Lupus International Collaborating
Clinics (SLICC)
• Ontario Cardiac Rehabilitation Registry (OCRR)
• ....
Acts of sharing
• Health Protection and Promotion Act, 1990
• Freedom of Info. and Protection of Privacy Act, 1990
• Personal Health Information Protection Act, 2004
– Health custodians in regulations:
•
•
•
•
1. Cancer Care Ontario.
2. Canadian Institute for Health Information.
3. Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences.
4. Pediatric Oncology Group of Ontario
• Health System Improvement Act, 2007
– Creates Ontario Agency for Health Protection and Promotion
Current state of access and
sharing
• Data access is possible
• By (and in partnership with)
• Recognized health custodians
• Partnership with Ministries of Health
• No truly open data library or warehouse
• Access is conditional on infrastructure, some
extension of access to researchers (e.g., ICESQueens and proposed elsewhere)
• Access improved in ~5 years,
• especially inside the system)
Partnering with data custodians
• Usually requires a Co-Investigator (or PI)
inside the custodian agency
• Understand that these are academics in
competitive settings, with restricted time for
plethora of requests
• Instantaneous partnerships have happened (don’t
always)
• Highly beneficial to have Government
interest
• A challenge for bureaucrats too (stretched;
regardless of intentions)
Selected external links
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
www.sph.utoronto.ca
www.ices.on.ca
www.cancercare.ca
www.rrfss.ca
www.camh.net
www.apheo.on.ca
www.chass.utoronto.ca/datalib/