Venous thromboembolism (VTE) events are tracked in trauma registries and by administrative data sets. Both databases are used to assess outcomes, despite having varying processes for data capture.

This study was performed at an urban, university-based, Level I trauma center from 2004 to 2014. Retrospective review of the trauma registry and the hospital’s administrative database was performed querying for all VTEs. Each VTE was then validated through manual chart review. Confirmed events were those with radiographic evidence of VTE by ultrasound, CT, and/or ventilation-perfusion scan. Sensitivity, specificity, and predictive values were calculated and compared between databases.

There were 19,353 trauma patients admitted during the study period; 656 VTEs were identified in the registry and 890 were identified via administrative data; 527 potential events were identified by both databases; 129 events were only in registry; and 363 were only found in the administrative database. We confirmed 636 of 656 events in registry (positive predictive value, 97%; 95% CI, 95.6% to 98.3%) vs 815 of 890 events in administrative data (positive predictive value, 91.6%; 95% CI, 89.75% to 93.4%; p < 0.001). Sensitivity was higher for administrative (87.2% vs 68.0%; p < 0.001), as 299 confirmed VTE events were not in the registry. Differences between the 2 databases were diminished when the analysis excluded untreated events and those present on admission. Twenty-three percent of validated deep vein thrombosis events in the registry were upper extremity events.

The trauma registry showed higher specificity and lower sensitivity compared with administrative data. The low false-positive rate of the trauma registry supports its validity in VTE outcomes research. Additional investigation is needed to evaluate the relevance of the variable sensitivity, likely due to definitional differences. Supplementation of trauma registry data with administrative data can strengthen its completeness.