Improving the quality of industry and occupation data at a central cancer registry

Authors

  • Karla R. Armenti ScD,

    Corresponding author
    1. New Hampshire Department of Health and Human Services, Division of Public Health Services, Office of Health Statistics and Data Management, Concord, New Hampshire
    • NH DHHS Division of Public Health Services, Office of Health Statistics and Data Management, 29 Hazen Drive, Concord, NH 03301-4604.
    Search for more papers by this author
  • Maria O. Celaya MPH,

    1. New Hampshire State Cancer Registry, Dartmouth Medical School, Department of Community and Family Medicine, Hanover, New Hampshire
    Search for more papers by this author
  • Sai Cherala MD,

    1. New Hampshire Department of Health and Human Services, Division of Public Health Services, Office of Health Statistics and Data Management, Concord, New Hampshire
    Search for more papers by this author
  • Bruce Riddle,

    1. New Hampshire State Cancer Registry, Dartmouth Medical School, Department of Community and Family Medicine, Hanover, New Hampshire
    Search for more papers by this author
  • Pamela K. Schumacher,

    1. Division of Surveillance, Health Evaluations and Field Studies, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Cincinnati, Ohio
    Search for more papers by this author
  • Judy R. Rees BM, BCh, PhD

    1. New Hampshire State Cancer Registry, Dartmouth Medical School, Department of Community and Family Medicine, Hanover, New Hampshire
    Search for more papers by this author

Abstract

Background

Central cancer registries are required to collect industry and occupation (I/O) information when available, but the data reported are often incomplete.

Methods

We audited the completeness of I/O data in the New Hampshire State Cancer Registry (NHSCR) database for diagnosis year 2005, and reviewed medical records for a convenience sample of 474 of these cases. We compared I/O data quality before and after a statewide registrar training session on occupationally related cancers.

Results

The original 2005 data contained both I/O data in 11.5% of cases, and lacked any I/O data in 74.5%. Corresponding figures for cases selected for audit were 15.2% and 77.2%, which improved to 54.2% and 11.8% after medical record review. After registrar training, 47% of reports contained both I/O data, and only 14.4% of cases lacked any I/O data.

Conclusions

Statewide training to highlight the importance of I/O data is an effective method to improve I/O data quality. Am. J. Ind. Med. 53:995–1001, 2010. © 2010 Wiley-Liss, Inc.

Ancillary