An Evaluation of Comparability between NEISS and ICD-9-CM Injury Coding

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the National Electronic Injury Surveillance System’s (NEISS) comparability with a data source that uses ICD-9-CM coding. METHODS: A sample of NEISS cases from a children’s hospital in 2008 was selected, and cases were linked with their original medical record. Medical records were reviewed and an ICD-9-CM code was assigned to each case. Cases in the NEISS sample that were non-injuries by ICD-9-CM standards were identified. A bridging matrix between the NEISS and ICD-9-CM injury coding systems, by type of injury classification, was proposed and evaluated. RESULTS: Of the 2,890 cases reviewed, 13.32% (n = 385) were non-injuries according to the ICD-9-CM diagnosis. Using the proposed matrix, the comparability of the NEISS with ICD-9-CM coding was favorable among injury cases (κ = 0.87, 95% CI: 0.85–0.88). The distribution of injury types among the entire sample was similar for the two systems, with percentage differences ≥1% for only open wounds or amputation, poisoning, and other or unspecified injury types. CONCLUSIONS: There is potential for conducting comparable injury research using NEISS and ICD-9-CM data. Due to the inclusion of some non-injuries in the NEISS and some differences in type of injury definitions between NEISS and ICD-9-CM coding, best practice for studies using NEISS data obtained from the CPSC should include manual review of case narratives. Use of the standardized injury and injury type definitions presented in this study will facilitate more accurate comparisons in injury research.