Cargando…

Comparing the validity of different ICD coding abstraction strategies for sepsis case identification in German claims data

INTRODUCTION: Administrative data are used to generate estimates of sepsis epidemiology and can serve as source for quality indicators. Aim was to compare estimates on sepsis incidence and mortality based on different ICD-code abstraction strategies and to assess their validity for sepsis case ident...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Fleischmann-Struzek, Carolin, Thomas-Rüddel, Daniel O., Schettler, Anna, Schwarzkopf, Daniel, Stacke, Angelika, Seymour, Christopher W., Haas, Christoph, Dennler, Ulf, Reinhart, Konrad
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Public Library of Science 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6066203/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30059504
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0198847
_version_ 1783342930538266624
author Fleischmann-Struzek, Carolin
Thomas-Rüddel, Daniel O.
Schettler, Anna
Schwarzkopf, Daniel
Stacke, Angelika
Seymour, Christopher W.
Haas, Christoph
Dennler, Ulf
Reinhart, Konrad
author_facet Fleischmann-Struzek, Carolin
Thomas-Rüddel, Daniel O.
Schettler, Anna
Schwarzkopf, Daniel
Stacke, Angelika
Seymour, Christopher W.
Haas, Christoph
Dennler, Ulf
Reinhart, Konrad
author_sort Fleischmann-Struzek, Carolin
collection PubMed
description INTRODUCTION: Administrative data are used to generate estimates of sepsis epidemiology and can serve as source for quality indicators. Aim was to compare estimates on sepsis incidence and mortality based on different ICD-code abstraction strategies and to assess their validity for sepsis case identification based on a patient sample not pre-selected for presence of sepsis codes. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We used the national DRG-statistics for assessment of population-level sepsis incidence and mortality. Cases were identified by three previously published International Statistical Classification of Diseases (ICD) coding strategies for sepsis based on primary and secondary discharge diagnoses (clinical sepsis codes (R-codes), explicit coding (all sepsis codes) and implicit coding (combined infection and organ dysfunction codes)). For the validation study, a stratified sample of 1120 adult patients admitted to a German academic medical center between 2007–2013 was selected. Administrative diagnoses were compared to a gold standard of clinical sepsis diagnoses based on manual chart review. RESULTS: In the validation study, 151/937 patients had sepsis. Explicit coding strategies performed better regarding sensitivity compared to R-codes, but had lower PPV. The implicit approach was the most sensitive for severe sepsis; however, it yielded a considerable number of false positives. R-codes and explicit strategies underestimate sepsis incidence by up to 3.5-fold. Between 2007–2013, national sepsis incidence ranged between 231-1006/100,000 person-years depending on the coding strategy. CONCLUSIONS: In the sample of a large tertiary care hospital, ICD-coding strategies for sepsis differ in their accuracy. Estimates using R-codes are likely to underestimate the true sepsis incidence, whereas implicit coding overestimates sepsis cases. Further multi-center evaluation is needed to gain better understanding on the validity of sepsis coding in Germany.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6066203
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher Public Library of Science
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-60662032018-08-10 Comparing the validity of different ICD coding abstraction strategies for sepsis case identification in German claims data Fleischmann-Struzek, Carolin Thomas-Rüddel, Daniel O. Schettler, Anna Schwarzkopf, Daniel Stacke, Angelika Seymour, Christopher W. Haas, Christoph Dennler, Ulf Reinhart, Konrad PLoS One Research Article INTRODUCTION: Administrative data are used to generate estimates of sepsis epidemiology and can serve as source for quality indicators. Aim was to compare estimates on sepsis incidence and mortality based on different ICD-code abstraction strategies and to assess their validity for sepsis case identification based on a patient sample not pre-selected for presence of sepsis codes. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We used the national DRG-statistics for assessment of population-level sepsis incidence and mortality. Cases were identified by three previously published International Statistical Classification of Diseases (ICD) coding strategies for sepsis based on primary and secondary discharge diagnoses (clinical sepsis codes (R-codes), explicit coding (all sepsis codes) and implicit coding (combined infection and organ dysfunction codes)). For the validation study, a stratified sample of 1120 adult patients admitted to a German academic medical center between 2007–2013 was selected. Administrative diagnoses were compared to a gold standard of clinical sepsis diagnoses based on manual chart review. RESULTS: In the validation study, 151/937 patients had sepsis. Explicit coding strategies performed better regarding sensitivity compared to R-codes, but had lower PPV. The implicit approach was the most sensitive for severe sepsis; however, it yielded a considerable number of false positives. R-codes and explicit strategies underestimate sepsis incidence by up to 3.5-fold. Between 2007–2013, national sepsis incidence ranged between 231-1006/100,000 person-years depending on the coding strategy. CONCLUSIONS: In the sample of a large tertiary care hospital, ICD-coding strategies for sepsis differ in their accuracy. Estimates using R-codes are likely to underestimate the true sepsis incidence, whereas implicit coding overestimates sepsis cases. Further multi-center evaluation is needed to gain better understanding on the validity of sepsis coding in Germany. Public Library of Science 2018-07-30 /pmc/articles/PMC6066203/ /pubmed/30059504 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0198847 Text en © 2018 Fleischmann-Struzek et al http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Fleischmann-Struzek, Carolin
Thomas-Rüddel, Daniel O.
Schettler, Anna
Schwarzkopf, Daniel
Stacke, Angelika
Seymour, Christopher W.
Haas, Christoph
Dennler, Ulf
Reinhart, Konrad
Comparing the validity of different ICD coding abstraction strategies for sepsis case identification in German claims data
title Comparing the validity of different ICD coding abstraction strategies for sepsis case identification in German claims data
title_full Comparing the validity of different ICD coding abstraction strategies for sepsis case identification in German claims data
title_fullStr Comparing the validity of different ICD coding abstraction strategies for sepsis case identification in German claims data
title_full_unstemmed Comparing the validity of different ICD coding abstraction strategies for sepsis case identification in German claims data
title_short Comparing the validity of different ICD coding abstraction strategies for sepsis case identification in German claims data
title_sort comparing the validity of different icd coding abstraction strategies for sepsis case identification in german claims data
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6066203/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30059504
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0198847
work_keys_str_mv AT fleischmannstruzekcarolin comparingthevalidityofdifferenticdcodingabstractionstrategiesforsepsiscaseidentificationingermanclaimsdata
AT thomasruddeldanielo comparingthevalidityofdifferenticdcodingabstractionstrategiesforsepsiscaseidentificationingermanclaimsdata
AT schettleranna comparingthevalidityofdifferenticdcodingabstractionstrategiesforsepsiscaseidentificationingermanclaimsdata
AT schwarzkopfdaniel comparingthevalidityofdifferenticdcodingabstractionstrategiesforsepsiscaseidentificationingermanclaimsdata
AT stackeangelika comparingthevalidityofdifferenticdcodingabstractionstrategiesforsepsiscaseidentificationingermanclaimsdata
AT seymourchristopherw comparingthevalidityofdifferenticdcodingabstractionstrategiesforsepsiscaseidentificationingermanclaimsdata
AT haaschristoph comparingthevalidityofdifferenticdcodingabstractionstrategiesforsepsiscaseidentificationingermanclaimsdata
AT dennlerulf comparingthevalidityofdifferenticdcodingabstractionstrategiesforsepsiscaseidentificationingermanclaimsdata
AT reinhartkonrad comparingthevalidityofdifferenticdcodingabstractionstrategiesforsepsiscaseidentificationingermanclaimsdata