The National Elective Surgery Waiting Times Data Collection (NESWTDC) provides episode-level data on patients added to or removed from elective surgery waiting lists managed by public hospitals. This includes private patients treated in public hospitals, and may include public patients treated in private hospitals. ‘Public hospitals’ may include hospitals which are set up to provide services for public patients (as public hospitals do), but which are managed privately. In 2010–11, the proportion of public hospital elective surgery covered by the NESWTDC was estimated to be 93%. The data supplied are based on the National Minimum Data Set for Elective surgery waiting times (removals data) (ESWT NMDS). The NESWTDC includes information on the number of additions to and removals from elective surgery waiting lists, the lengths of time waited, specialties of surgeons and indicator procedures. Removals are counted for patients who have been removed for admission or for another reason. Patients who were ‘ready for care’ and patients who were ‘not ready for care’ at the time of removal are included. The NESWTDC includes data for each year from 2002–03 to 2010–11. Summary of key issues • For 2010–11, the National Elective Surgery Waiting Times Data Collection (NESWTDC) covered most public hospitals that undertook elective surgery. Hospitals that were not included may not undertake elective surgery, may not have had waiting lists, or may have had different waiting lists compared to other hospitals. • For 2010–11, the proportion of public hospital elective surgery covered by the NESWTDC was estimated to be 93%. • For 2010–11, Victoria’s data does not include the Albury Base Hospital as the data were not available. • Although there are national standards for data on elective surgery waiting times, methods to calculate waiting times have varied between states and territories and over time. For example, some states and territories vary in how they report on patients transferred from a waiting list managed by one hospital to that managed by another. • The quality of the data reported for Indigenous status for the NESWTDC has not been formally assessed; therefore, caution should be exercised when interpreting these data. • There is an apparent lack of comparability of clinical urgency categories among jurisdictions that may result in statistics that are not meaningful or comparable between jurisdictions, and therefore have limited application for national elective surgery waiting times statistics. • There is apparent variation in recording practices for waiting times for elective surgery for patients awaiting ‘staged’ procedures (such as follow-up care, cystoscopy or the removal of pins or plates), that may result in statistics that are not meaningful or comparable between or within jurisdictions. |