Danish National Lymphoma Registry

AIM OF DATABASE: The Danish National Lymphoma Registry (LYFO) was established in order to monitor and improve the diagnostic evaluation and the quality of treatment of all lymphoma patients in Denmark. STUDY POPULATION: The LYFO database was established in 1982 as a seminational database including all lymphoma patients referred to the departments of hematology. The database became nationwide on January 1, 2000. MAIN VARIABLES: The main variables include both clinical and paraclinical variables as well as details of treatment and treatment evaluation. Up to four forms are completed for each patient: a primary registration form, a treatment form, a relapse form, and a follow-up form. Variables are used to calculate six result quality indicators (mortality 30 and 180 days after diagnosis, response to first-line treatment, and survival estimates 1, 3, and 5 years after the time of diagnosis), and three process quality indicators (time from diagnosis until the start of treatment, the presence of relevant diagnostic markers, and inclusion rate in clinical protocols). DESCRIPTIVE DATA: Approximately 23,000 patients were registered in the period 1982–2014 with a median age of 65 years (range: 16–100 years) and a male/female ratio of 1.23:1. Patients can be registered with any of 42 different subtypes according to the World Health Organization classifications. CONCLUSION: LYFO is a nationwide database for all lymphoma patients in Denmark and includes detailed information. This information is used for both epidemiological research and clinical follow-up as well as for administrative purposes

The Danish National Lymphoma Registry:Coverage and Data Quality

BACKGROUND:The Danish National Lymphoma Register (LYFO) prospectively includes information on all lymphoma patients newly diagnosed at hematology departments in Denmark. The validity of the clinical information in the LYFO has never been systematically assessed. AIM:To test the coverage and data quality of the LYFO. METHODS:The coverage was tested by merging data of the LYFO with the Danish Cancer Register and the Danish National Patient Register, respectively. The validity of the LYFO was assessed by crosschecking with information from medical records in subgroups of patients. A random sample of 3% (N = 364) was made from all patients in the LYFO. In addition, four subtypes of lymphomas were validated: CNS lymphomas, diffuse large B-cell lymphomas, peripheral T-cell lymphomas, and Hodgkin lymphomas. A total of 1,706 patients from the period 2000-2012 were included. The positive predictive values (PPVs) and completeness of selected variables were calculated for each subgroup and for the entire cohort of patients. RESULTS:The comparison of data from the LYFO with the Danish Cancer Register and the Danish National Patient Register revealed a high coverage. In addition, the data quality was good with high PPVs (87% to 100%), and high completeness (92% to 100%). CONCLUSION:The LYFO is a unique, nationwide clinical database characterized by high validity, good coverage and prospective data entry. It represents a valuable resource for future lymphoma research

Evaluation of the decision support system for antimicrobial treatment, TREAT, in an acute medical ward of a university hospital

Objectives: TREAT, a decision support system for antimicrobial therapy, was implemented in an acute medical ward. Methods: Patients admitted on suspicion of infection were included in the study. The evaluation of TREAT was done both retrospectively and prospectively. Coverage of empirical antimicrobial treatments was compared to recommendations from TREAT and the optimal use of local guidelines. Results: Five hundred and eleven patients were included, of whom 162 had a microbiologically documented infection. In the retrospective part of the study, TREAT, physician, and guideline antimicrobial coverage rates were 65%, 51%, and 79%, respectively, and in the prospective part, 68%, 62%, and 77%, respectively. TREAT provided lower coverage than local guidelines (p < 0.001), but was similar to the performance of physicians in a university hospital (p = 0.069). No differences were found in length of hospital stay, or hospital or 30-day mortality. Direct costs were significantly higher for TREAT advice than for local guidelines or the physician prescriptions (p < 0.001), but the ecological costs were lower for TREAT advice than for both local guidelines (p < 0.001) and physician prescriptions (p = 0.247). The coverage of TREAT advice for the bacteraemia patients was non-inferior to the physicians (p = 1.00). Conclusions: TREAT can potentially improve the ecological costs of empirical antimicrobial therapy for patients in acute medical wards, but provided lower coverage than local guidelines