1. Stakeholder Update Building A New Trauma Registry
Registry Solution Work Group
(RSWG)
May, 2011

2. What I’ll be presenting today…
Stakeholder involvement
RSWG purpose, objectives & composition
Texas Trauma System Assessments
National Data Standards
RSWG recommended data elements
How to obtain more information
How to provide input and feedback

3. Stakeholder Involvement
Trauma Registry Improvement System Assessment (TRISA) by MTG Management Consultants
Arose from stakeholder and agency concerns about current system
Stakeholder needs assessment
To identify requirements for new system
Best Practices assessment from other states
Recommended Agency and Stakeholder Coordination to build new registry

4. RSWG Purpose To Provide
A means for stakeholders to communicate subject matter expertise to DSHS
The interface with other Stakeholder groups to ensure new registry meets the stakeholder needs
The formation of the RSWG is a result of the acknowledgement of the importance of stakeholder involvement in discussions pertaining to the functioning of the trauma registry and thus provides the opportunity to partner with DSHS to work on specific goals.

5. Composition of RSWG and Stakeholder Groups Represented
Hospitals
EMS
GETAC
TETAF
RACs
DSHS
TXDOT
NEMSIS (Invited for data element consultation)
Hospitals – Adult and Pediatric Trauma Centers,
EMS Rural and Urban EMS Providers,
GETAC (Governors EMS Trauma Advisory Council),
TETAF (Texas EMS Trauma and Acute Care Foundation),
RACs (Regional Advisory Councils),
DSHS (Department of State Health Services
TXDOT: (Texas Department of Transportation) They have partnered with DSHS to provide funding for the creation of the new system because of our shared goals to prevent motor vehicle injuries. Our objective is to be able to combine information collected by TXDOT pertaining to the details of the event with information collected by DSHS pertaining to the patients injuries. As you may know, the NEMSIS is a system of the National Highway Traffic Administration.
NEMSIS (National EMS Information System)

6. RSWG Objectives Initial Objective
Assist with the creation of the RFO (Request For Offer) for new trauma registry
Recent Objective
Recommend data elements for the new trauma registry system
Future Objective
Serve as a continued means for stakeholder involvement in the development and operation of new trauma registry system

7. RSWG Meetings
The RSWG has been meeting since January of 2011 to discuss data elements for the new trauma registry
Weekly conference calls
Use of ‘Go to Meeting’ to view files together

8. National Data Standards NEMSIS & NTDB
The MTG Assessment (Stakeholder Needs)
NEMSIS* and NTDB* be the accepted standards for the new system
The American College of Surgeons (ACS)#
Recommended the Texas Trauma Registry collect NEMSIS and NTDB data elements
The RSWG recommends the Texas Hospital Trauma Data Set following the NTDB’s required data elements as listed within the National Trauma Data Standards.
This recommendation is the result of several evaluations and feedback received from the Stakeholders.
MTG Management Consultants held 10 Stakeholder meetings across the State with over 200 EMS and Hospital participants. The meetings took place during the months of June and July In addition to the meetings MTG sent out a registry needs survey to the stakeholder group. After completing a review of stakeholders needs in August 2009 MTG issued the Stakeholder Survey Results and within the TOP 10 Findings and within the top 10 was the requirement for the registry to be NTDB complaint.
*NEMSIS – National EMS Information System NTDB – National Trauma data Bank
#ACS – Trauma System Consultation Report to Texas

9. RSWG NTDB Recommendations
All NTDB data elements currently submitted to NTDB by Level I and Level II hospitals be available in the trauma registry for customer use

10. RSWG NEMSIS Recommendations
All NEMSIS data elements be available in the trauma registry for customer use
NEMSIS data elements, required by NEMSIS for national and state benchmarking, be reported to the trauma Registry.
The RSWG was fortunate to have Karen Jacobson, TAC Director for NEMSIS join us on several conference calls to discuss the data elements.
NEMSIS Version 3 compliance means that the software will go through a testing and certification process by the NEMSIS Technical Assistance Center which will include:
Ability to export
Demographic (Agency) XML (via test cases)
All Version 3 elements
National elements only (subset)
EMS (Event) XML (via test cases)
The NEMSIS standard today is Version and EMS data will be accepted in this format by NEMSIS through 2014.
NEMSIS Version 3 Dataset tentative public release date is scheduled for July 2011 as a Beta Release.
Development by EMS software community
3 month window for any last suggested changes to the dataset

11. Current Trauma Registry Elements
Current Trauma Registry Elements not included in the recommended NEMSIS or NTDB elements
Were recommended if they pertained to
System performance improvement
Patient outcome evaluation
The RSWG will meet with Stakeholders from Level III and Level IV hospitals to assess their needs for performance indicator data elements to be available in the trauma registry.

12. Next Steps
DSHS will post documents pertaining to recommended data elements on website.
DSHS will provide on-line mechanism to collect comments and questions pertaining to RSWG recommended data elements
DSHS will provide Webinars for stakeholders to discuss RSWG recommended data elements
DSHS will create a Frequently Asked Questions Document and post it on website
DSHS will send notification to stakeholders with information on the location of documents and how to provide feedback

13. Summary
RSWG recommends all NEMSIS and NTDB data elements be available in the system for customer use
RSWG recommends current Trauma Registry data elements pertaining to system performance improvement be available in the system for customer use
RSWG will continue working with DSHS to build the new trauma registry
DSHS is providing a website tool and webinars for stakeholders to provide feedback on the recommended data elements