hospitals availability of sampling but no sample due to large hospitals validation check sample size - Hospital 2 none or below 0 Hardly above 1 well above 2 sample size advised minimum advised advised minimum (Table minimum 4.1) (Table 4.1) FDS data 2 none 0 Sample below 1 Sample above 2 FDS>MDS minimum minimum expected expected (<3000) (3000+) C. Total score (max. 20) 18 D. Prospects for 2016-2017 Score Comments 2 - Will the MDS no 0 Not secured yet 1 yes 2 data collection continue in 2016? - Improvement 1 None or just draft 0 in consultation 1 No substantial 2 or maintenance improvements plan in place necessary for next years? - Legal basis for 2 No plans 0 Ongoing 1 In place or 2 MDS data substantial very likely collection? discussion - Capacities in 1 Will be reduced 0 Scarce but stay 1 Sufficient or 2 your the same will increase organization for injury data collection/ analysis? - Interest to 1 no 0 Yes, but 1 Yes, we 2 participate in depending on remain future EU injury availability of strongly information internal interested projects? resources D. Total score (max. 10) 7 Summary Excellent system due to a solid legal basis. Main shortcoming is the bias towards admissions. However, the IRs generated Implementation automatically at the EU IDB web-gate are corrected for this bias, Assessment valid estimates for all ED cases available. Signatures Function Place, date Name Signature National IDB data OK for JAMIE final Riga Jana Lepiksone administrator score card June 2014 Vienna, 16 October BRIDGE-Health IDB Rupert Kisser OK 2015
hospitals availability of hospitals sampling but no validation check sample due to large sample size - Hospital sample size none or below advised minimum 0 Hardly above advised minimum (Table 4.1) 1 well above advised minimum (Table 4.1) 2 2 FDS data none 0 Sample below minimum expected (<3000) 1 Sample above minimum expected (3000+) 2 2 FDS>MDS C. Total score (max. 20) 18 D. Prospects for 2016-2017 Score Comments - Will the MDS data collection continue in 2016? no 0 Not secured yet 1 yes 2 2 - Improvement or maintenance plan in place for next years? None or just draft 0 in consultation 1 No substantial improvements necessary 2 1 - Legal basis for MDS data collection? No plans 0 Ongoing substantial discussion 1 In place or very likely 2 2 - Capacities in your organization for injury data collection/ analysis? Will be reduced 0 Scarce but stay the same 1 Sufficient or will increase 2 1 - Interest to participate in future EU injury information projects? no 0 Yes, but depending on availability of internal resources 1 Yes, we remain strongly interested 2 1 D. Total score (max. 10) 7 Summary Implementation Assessment Excellent system due to a solid legal basis. Main shortcoming is the bias towards admissions. However, the IRs generated automatically at the EU IDB web-gate are corrected for this bias, valid estimates for all ED cases available. Signatures Function Place, date Name Signature National IDB data administrator Riga Jana Lepiksone OK for JAMIE final score card June 2014 BRIDGE-Health IDB Vienna, 16 October 2015 Rupert Kisser OK
Sustainability%20Report.docx