首页> 外文期刊>Medical care >Identifying in-hospital venous thromboembolism (VTE): a comparison of claims-based approaches with the Rochester Epidemiology Project VTE cohort.
【24h】

Identifying in-hospital venous thromboembolism (VTE): a comparison of claims-based approaches with the Rochester Epidemiology Project VTE cohort.

机译:识别医院内静脉血栓栓塞症(VTE):基于索赔的方法与Rochester流行病学项目VTE队列的比较。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

BACKGROUND: Efforts to identify hospital-acquired complications from claims data by applying exclusion rules to discharge diagnosis codes exhibit low positive predictive value (PPV). The PPV improves when a variable is added to each secondary diagnosis to indicate whether the condition was "present-on-admission" (POA) or "hospital-acquired". Such indicator variables will soon be required for Medicare reimbursement. No estimates are available, however, of the proportion of hospital-acquired complications that are missed (sensitivity) using either exclusion rules or indicator variables. We estimated sensitivity, specificity, PPV, and negative predictive value (NPV) of claims-based approaches using the Rochester Epidemiology Project (REP) venous thromboembolism (VTE) cohort as a "gold standard." METHODS: All inpatient encounters by Olmsted County, Minnesota, residents at Mayo Clinic-affiliated hospitals 1995-1998 constituted the at-risk-population. REP-identified hospital-acquired VTE consisted of all objectively-diagnosed VTE among County residents 1995-1998, whose onset of symptoms occurred during inpatient stays at these hospitals, as confirmed by detailed review of County residents' provider-linked medical records. Claims-based approaches used billing data from these hospitals. RESULTS: Of 37,845 inpatient encounters, 98 had REP-identified hospital-acquired VTE; 47 (48%) were medical encounters. NPV and specificity were >99% for both claims-based approaches. Although indicator variables provided higher PPV (74%) compared with exclusion rules (35%), the sensitivity for exclusion rules was 74% compared with only 38% for indicator variables. Misclassification was greater for medical than surgical encounters. CONCLUSIONS: Utility and accuracy of claims data for identifying hospital-acquired conditions, including POA indicator variables, requires close attention be paid by clinicians and coders to what is being recorded.
机译:背景:通过将排除规则应用于出院诊断代码来从索赔数据中识别医院获得的并发症的努力表现出较低的阳性预测值(PPV)。当向每个二级诊断中添加变量以指示该状况是“入院时存在”(POA)还是“医院获得性”时,PPV会提高。此类指标变量将很快用于Medicare报销。但是,无法使用排除规则或指标变量来估计错过的医院获得性并发症(敏感性)的比例(敏感性)。我们使用罗切斯特流行病学计划(REP)静脉血栓栓塞(VTE)队列作为“金标准”,评估了基于声明的方法的敏感性,特异性,PPV和阴性预测值(NPV)。方法:1995-1998年,在明尼苏达州奥尔姆斯特德县,梅奥诊所附属医院的居民中,所有住院病人的遭遇都构成了高风险人群。 REP鉴定的医院获得的VTE包括1995-1998年县居民中所有经客观诊断的VTE,其症状的发作是在这些医院住院期间发生的,这一点已通过对县居民提供者相关医疗记录的详细审查得到证实。基于索赔的方法使用了这些医院的计费数据。结果:在37,845例住院病人中,有98例由REP确定为医院获得的VTE; 47(48%)是医疗遭遇。两种基于声明的方法的NPV和特异性均> 99%。尽管与排除规则(35%)相比,指标变量提供更高的PPV(74%),但排除规则的敏感性为74%,而指标变量仅为38%。医疗方面的错误分类比手术方面的错误更大。结论:索赔数据用于识别医院获得的疾病的实用性和准确性,包括POA指标变量,需要临床医生和编码人员密切注意所记录的内容。

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