...
首页> 外文期刊>Health services research: HSR >Assessing validity of ICD-9-CM and ICD-10 administrative data in recording clinical conditions in a unique dually coded database.
【24h】

Assessing validity of ICD-9-CM and ICD-10 administrative data in recording clinical conditions in a unique dually coded database.

机译:在唯一的双重编码数据库中评估ICD-9-CM和ICD-10管理数据在记录临床状况方面的有效性。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例

摘要

OBJECTIVE: The goal of this study was to assess the validity of the International Classification of Disease, 10th Version (ICD-10) administrative hospital discharge data and to determine whether there were improvements in the validity of coding for clinical conditions compared with ICD-9 Clinical Modification (ICD-9-CM) data. METHODS: We reviewed 4,008 randomly selected charts for patients admitted from January 1 to June 30, 2003 at four teaching hospitals in Alberta, Canada to determine the presence or absence of 32 clinical conditions and to assess the agreement between ICD-10 data and chart data. We then re-coded the same charts using ICD-9-CM and determined the agreement between the ICD-9-CM data and chart data for recording those same conditions. The accuracy of ICD-10 data relative to chart data was compared with the accuracy of ICD-9-CM data relative to chart data. RESULTS: Sensitivity values ranged from 9.3 to 83.1 percent for ICD-9-CM and from 12.7 to 80.8 percent for ICD-10 data. Positive predictive values ranged from 23.1 to 100 percent for ICD-9-CM and from 32.0 to 100 percent for ICD-10 data. Specificity and negative predictive values were consistently high for both ICD-9-CM and ICD-10 databases. Of the 32 conditions assessed, ICD-10 data had significantly higher sensitivity for one condition and lower sensitivity for seven conditions relative to ICD-9-CM data. The two databases had similar sensitivity values for the remaining 24 conditions. CONCLUSIONS: The validity of ICD-9-CM and ICD-10 administrative data in recording clinical conditions was generally similar though validity differed between coding versions for some conditions. The implementation of ICD-10 coding has not significantly improved the quality of administrative data relative to ICD-9-CM. Future assessments like this one are needed because the validity of ICD-10 data may get better as coders gain experience with the new coding system.
机译:目的:本研究的目的是评估国际疾病分类第10版(ICD-10)行政医院出院数据的有效性,并确定与ICD-9相比,临床状况编码的有效性是否得到改善临床修改(ICD-9-CM)数据。方法:我们回顾了2003年1月1日至2003年6月30日在加拿大艾伯塔省的四家教学医院住院的患者的4008张随机选择的图表,以确定是否存在32种临床情况并评估ICD-10数据与图表数据之间的一致性。然后,我们使用ICD-9-CM对相同的图表进行了重新编码,并确定了ICD-9-CM数据与记录这些相同条件的图表数据之间的一致性。将ICD-10数据相对于图表数据的准确性与ICD-9-CM数据相对于图表数据的准确性进行了比较。结果:ICD-9-CM的灵敏度值范围从9.3%到83.1%,ICD-10数据的灵敏度值从12.7%到80.8%。 ICD-9-CM的阳性预测值范围从23.1%到100%,ICD-10数据的阳性预测值范围从32.0到100%。 ICD-9-CM和ICD-10数据库的特异性和阴性预测值始终很高。在评估的32种情况中,相对于ICD-9-CM数据,ICD-10数据对一种情况的敏感性显着较高,对七个条件的敏感性较低。对于其余24个条件,这两个数据库具有相似的灵敏度值。结论:ICD-9-CM和ICD-10行政数据在记录临床情况方面的有效性大致相似,尽管某些情况下编码版本之间的有效性有所不同。相对于ICD-9-CM,ICD-10编码的实施并未显着提高管理数据的质量。之所以需要进行此类评估,是因为随着编码人员获得新编码系统的经验,ICD-10数据的有效性可能会提高。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号