Cargando…
A Validation Study of Administrative Claims Data to Measure Ovarian Cancer Recurrence and Secondary Debulking Surgery
OBJECTIVE: Administrative claims data offer an alternative to chart abstraction to assess ovarian cancer recurrence, treatment and outcomes. Such analyses have been hindered by lack of valid recurrence and treatment algorithms. In this study, we sought to develop claims-based algorithms to identify...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
AcademyHealth
2016
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5108632/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27891525 http://dx.doi.org/10.13063/2327-9214.1208 |
_version_ | 1782467394663350272 |
---|---|
author | Livaudais-Toman, Jennifer Egorova, Natalia Franco, Rebeca Prasad-Hayes, Monica Howell, Elizabeth A. Wisnivesky, Juan Bickell, Nina A. |
author_facet | Livaudais-Toman, Jennifer Egorova, Natalia Franco, Rebeca Prasad-Hayes, Monica Howell, Elizabeth A. Wisnivesky, Juan Bickell, Nina A. |
author_sort | Livaudais-Toman, Jennifer |
collection | PubMed |
description | OBJECTIVE: Administrative claims data offer an alternative to chart abstraction to assess ovarian cancer recurrence, treatment and outcomes. Such analyses have been hindered by lack of valid recurrence and treatment algorithms. In this study, we sought to develop claims-based algorithms to identify ovarian cancer recurrence and secondary debulking surgery, and to validate them against the gold-standard of chart abstraction. METHODS: We conducted chart validation studies; 2 recurrence algorithms and 1 secondary surgery among 94 ovarian cancer patients treated at one hospital between 2003–2009. A new recurrence algorithm was based on treatment timing (≥6 months after primary treatment) and a previously validated algorithm was based on secondary malignancy codes. A secondary debulking surgery algorithm was based on surgical billing codes. RESULTS: The new recurrence algorithm had: sensitivity=100% (95% confidence interval [CI]=87%-=100%), specificity=89% (95%CI=78%–95%), kappa=84% (SE=10%) while the secondary-malignancy-=code recurrence algorithm had: sensitivity=84% (95%CI=66%–94%), specificity=44% (95%CI=31%-=57%), kappa=23% (SE=8%). The secondary surgery algorithm had: sensitivity=77% (95%CI=50%–92%), = specificity= 92% (95%CI=83%–97%), kappa=66% (SE=10%).= CONCLUSIONS: A recurrence algorithm based on treatment timing accurately identified ovarian cancer =recurrence. If validated in other populations, such an algorithm can provide a tool to compare effectiveness of recurrent ovarian cancer treatments. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-5108632 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2016 |
publisher | AcademyHealth |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-51086322016-11-25 A Validation Study of Administrative Claims Data to Measure Ovarian Cancer Recurrence and Secondary Debulking Surgery Livaudais-Toman, Jennifer Egorova, Natalia Franco, Rebeca Prasad-Hayes, Monica Howell, Elizabeth A. Wisnivesky, Juan Bickell, Nina A. EGEMS (Wash DC) Articles OBJECTIVE: Administrative claims data offer an alternative to chart abstraction to assess ovarian cancer recurrence, treatment and outcomes. Such analyses have been hindered by lack of valid recurrence and treatment algorithms. In this study, we sought to develop claims-based algorithms to identify ovarian cancer recurrence and secondary debulking surgery, and to validate them against the gold-standard of chart abstraction. METHODS: We conducted chart validation studies; 2 recurrence algorithms and 1 secondary surgery among 94 ovarian cancer patients treated at one hospital between 2003–2009. A new recurrence algorithm was based on treatment timing (≥6 months after primary treatment) and a previously validated algorithm was based on secondary malignancy codes. A secondary debulking surgery algorithm was based on surgical billing codes. RESULTS: The new recurrence algorithm had: sensitivity=100% (95% confidence interval [CI]=87%-=100%), specificity=89% (95%CI=78%–95%), kappa=84% (SE=10%) while the secondary-malignancy-=code recurrence algorithm had: sensitivity=84% (95%CI=66%–94%), specificity=44% (95%CI=31%-=57%), kappa=23% (SE=8%). The secondary surgery algorithm had: sensitivity=77% (95%CI=50%–92%), = specificity= 92% (95%CI=83%–97%), kappa=66% (SE=10%).= CONCLUSIONS: A recurrence algorithm based on treatment timing accurately identified ovarian cancer =recurrence. If validated in other populations, such an algorithm can provide a tool to compare effectiveness of recurrent ovarian cancer treatments. AcademyHealth 2016-11-01 /pmc/articles/PMC5108632/ /pubmed/27891525 http://dx.doi.org/10.13063/2327-9214.1208 Text en All eGEMs publications are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 License http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/ |
spellingShingle | Articles Livaudais-Toman, Jennifer Egorova, Natalia Franco, Rebeca Prasad-Hayes, Monica Howell, Elizabeth A. Wisnivesky, Juan Bickell, Nina A. A Validation Study of Administrative Claims Data to Measure Ovarian Cancer Recurrence and Secondary Debulking Surgery |
title | A Validation Study of Administrative Claims Data to Measure Ovarian Cancer Recurrence and Secondary Debulking Surgery |
title_full | A Validation Study of Administrative Claims Data to Measure Ovarian Cancer Recurrence and Secondary Debulking Surgery |
title_fullStr | A Validation Study of Administrative Claims Data to Measure Ovarian Cancer Recurrence and Secondary Debulking Surgery |
title_full_unstemmed | A Validation Study of Administrative Claims Data to Measure Ovarian Cancer Recurrence and Secondary Debulking Surgery |
title_short | A Validation Study of Administrative Claims Data to Measure Ovarian Cancer Recurrence and Secondary Debulking Surgery |
title_sort | validation study of administrative claims data to measure ovarian cancer recurrence and secondary debulking surgery |
topic | Articles |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5108632/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27891525 http://dx.doi.org/10.13063/2327-9214.1208 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT livaudaistomanjennifer avalidationstudyofadministrativeclaimsdatatomeasureovariancancerrecurrenceandsecondarydebulkingsurgery AT egorovanatalia avalidationstudyofadministrativeclaimsdatatomeasureovariancancerrecurrenceandsecondarydebulkingsurgery AT francorebeca avalidationstudyofadministrativeclaimsdatatomeasureovariancancerrecurrenceandsecondarydebulkingsurgery AT prasadhayesmonica avalidationstudyofadministrativeclaimsdatatomeasureovariancancerrecurrenceandsecondarydebulkingsurgery AT howellelizabetha avalidationstudyofadministrativeclaimsdatatomeasureovariancancerrecurrenceandsecondarydebulkingsurgery AT wisniveskyjuan avalidationstudyofadministrativeclaimsdatatomeasureovariancancerrecurrenceandsecondarydebulkingsurgery AT bickellninaa avalidationstudyofadministrativeclaimsdatatomeasureovariancancerrecurrenceandsecondarydebulkingsurgery AT livaudaistomanjennifer validationstudyofadministrativeclaimsdatatomeasureovariancancerrecurrenceandsecondarydebulkingsurgery AT egorovanatalia validationstudyofadministrativeclaimsdatatomeasureovariancancerrecurrenceandsecondarydebulkingsurgery AT francorebeca validationstudyofadministrativeclaimsdatatomeasureovariancancerrecurrenceandsecondarydebulkingsurgery AT prasadhayesmonica validationstudyofadministrativeclaimsdatatomeasureovariancancerrecurrenceandsecondarydebulkingsurgery AT howellelizabetha validationstudyofadministrativeclaimsdatatomeasureovariancancerrecurrenceandsecondarydebulkingsurgery AT wisniveskyjuan validationstudyofadministrativeclaimsdatatomeasureovariancancerrecurrenceandsecondarydebulkingsurgery AT bickellninaa validationstudyofadministrativeclaimsdatatomeasureovariancancerrecurrenceandsecondarydebulkingsurgery |