Features of physician services databases in Canada

Abstract

Introduction Physician services databases (PSDs) are a valuable resource for research and surveillance in Canada. However, because the provinces and territories collect and maintain separate databases, data elements are not standardized. This study compared major features of PSDs. Methods The primary source was a survey of key informants that collected information about years of data, patient/provider characteristics, database inclusions/exclusions, coding of diagnoses, procedures and service locations. Data from the Canadian Institute for Health Information's (CIHI) National Physician Database were used to examine physician remuneration methods, which may affect PSD completeness. Survey data were obtained for nine provinces and two territories. Results Most databases contained post-1990 records. Diagnoses were frequently recorded using ICD-9 codes. Other coding systems differed across jurisdictions and time, although all PSDs identified in-hospital services and distinguished family medicine from other specialties. Capture of non-fee-for-service records varied and CIHI data revealed an increasing proportion of non-fee-for-service physicians over time. Conclusion Further research is needed to investigate the potential effects of PSD differences on comparability of findings from pan-Canadian studies.

Breast Cancer Care in California and Ontario: Primary Care Protections Greatest Among the Most Socioeconomically Vulnerable Women Living in the Most Underserved Places

“…We joined participants to county-level active physician data via Canadian Institute for Health Information and American Medical Association databases (2000-2001). 47 - 51 PCPs reported general or family practice. Physicians who reported the majority of their time in specialized practice or were board certified in that specialty were so defined.…”

Data variability across Canadian administrative health databases: Differences in content, coding, and completeness

“…Many of these have been described in detail elsewhere. [9][10][11] Although not the main focus of this article, it is important to highlight the differences in provincial drug claims data (see Table 1), as the study period and population are dependent on these data. First, the earliest date of provincial drug data availability ranges from 1983 in Quebec to 1997 in Ontario.…”

“…The physician claims databases in each province and territory contain information on all outpatient encounters. As summarized by Lix and colleagues, the earliest dates of data availability are from the 1970s in Manitoba and Saskatchewan, with data available in all other provinces as of the 1990s 11 (see Table 1). Common to each database is a patient identifier, patient sex and date of birth, service date, physician identifier and specialty, a diagnosis code, and fee codes that identify the procedures and services rendered.…”

Chronic pain patients' willingness to share personal identifiers on the web for the linkage of medico‐administrative claims and patient‐reported data: The chronic pain treatment cohort

“…The COPE cohort is a web-based prospective study intended to gain a better insight into the real-world utilization of pharmacological and nonpharmacological treatments among people living with chronic pain in the province of Quebec (Canada). Eligibility requirements for participants were as follows: (1) to report persistent or recurrent pain for more than 3 months (as defined by the International Association for the Study of Pain 24 ), (2) to be at least 18 years of age, (3) to reside in the province of Quebec, and (4) to be able to complete a web-based questionnaire in French (the residents of this east-central Canadian province are predominantly French-speaking: 85.5% report French as…”