Validation of a Rule-Based ICD-10-CM Algorithm to Detect Fall Injuries in Medicare Data

David A Ganz, Denise Esserman, Nancy K Latham, Michael Kane, Lillian C Min, Thomas M Gill, David B Reuben, Peter Peduzzi, Erich J Greene
{"title":"Validation of a Rule-Based ICD-10-CM Algorithm to Detect Fall Injuries in Medicare Data","authors":"David A Ganz, Denise Esserman, Nancy K Latham, Michael Kane, Lillian C Min, Thomas M Gill, David B Reuben, Peter Peduzzi, Erich J Greene","doi":"10.1093/gerona/glae096","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background Diagnosis-code-based algorithms to identify fall injuries in Medicare data are useful for ascertaining outcomes in interventional and observational studies. However, these algorithms have not been validated against a fully external reference standard, in ICD-10-CM, or in Medicare Advantage (MA) data. Methods We linked self-reported fall injuries leading to medical attention (FIMA) from the Strategies to Reduce Injuries and Develop Confidence in Elders (STRIDE) trial (reference standard) to Medicare fee-for-service (FFS) and MA data from 2015-2019. We measured the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) based on sensitivity and specificity of a diagnosis-code-based algorithm against the reference standard for presence or absence of ≥1 FIMA within a specified window of dates, varying the window size to obtain points on the curve. We stratified results by source (FFS versus MA), trial arm (intervention versus control), and STRIDE’s ten participating healthcare systems. Results Both reference standard data and Medicare data were available for 4941 (of 5451) participants. The reference standard and algorithm identified 2054 and 2067 FIMA, respectively. The algorithm had 45% sensitivity (95% confidence interval [CI], 43%-47%) and 99% specificity (95% CI, 99%-99%) to identify reference standard FIMA within the same calendar month. The AUC was 0.79 (95% CI, 0.78-0.81) and was similar by FFS or MA data source or trial arm, but showed variation among STRIDE healthcare systems (AUC range by healthcare system, 0.71 to 0.84). Conclusions An ICD-10-CM algorithm to identify fall injuries demonstrated acceptable performance against an external reference standard, in both MA and FFS data.","PeriodicalId":22892,"journal":{"name":"The Journals of Gerontology Series A: Biological Sciences and Medical Sciences","volume":"55 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Journals of Gerontology Series A: Biological Sciences and Medical Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/gerona/glae096","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background Diagnosis-code-based algorithms to identify fall injuries in Medicare data are useful for ascertaining outcomes in interventional and observational studies. However, these algorithms have not been validated against a fully external reference standard, in ICD-10-CM, or in Medicare Advantage (MA) data. Methods We linked self-reported fall injuries leading to medical attention (FIMA) from the Strategies to Reduce Injuries and Develop Confidence in Elders (STRIDE) trial (reference standard) to Medicare fee-for-service (FFS) and MA data from 2015-2019. We measured the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) based on sensitivity and specificity of a diagnosis-code-based algorithm against the reference standard for presence or absence of ≥1 FIMA within a specified window of dates, varying the window size to obtain points on the curve. We stratified results by source (FFS versus MA), trial arm (intervention versus control), and STRIDE’s ten participating healthcare systems. Results Both reference standard data and Medicare data were available for 4941 (of 5451) participants. The reference standard and algorithm identified 2054 and 2067 FIMA, respectively. The algorithm had 45% sensitivity (95% confidence interval [CI], 43%-47%) and 99% specificity (95% CI, 99%-99%) to identify reference standard FIMA within the same calendar month. The AUC was 0.79 (95% CI, 0.78-0.81) and was similar by FFS or MA data source or trial arm, but showed variation among STRIDE healthcare systems (AUC range by healthcare system, 0.71 to 0.84). Conclusions An ICD-10-CM algorithm to identify fall injuries demonstrated acceptable performance against an external reference standard, in both MA and FFS data.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
验证基于规则的 ICD-10-CM 算法以检测医疗保险数据中的跌倒伤害
背景 基于诊断代码的算法可识别医疗保险数据中的跌倒伤害,有助于确定介入性和观察性研究的结果。然而,这些算法尚未根据完全外部参考标准、ICD-10-CM 或医疗保险优势(MA)数据进行验证。方法 我们将 "减少伤害和培养老年人自信的策略"(STRIDE)试验(参考标准)中自我报告的导致医疗关注的跌倒伤害(FIMA)与 2015-2019 年的医疗保险付费服务(FFS)和 MA 数据联系起来。我们根据基于诊断代码的算法的灵敏度和特异性,对照参考标准测量了在指定日期窗口内是否存在≥1 次 FIMA 的接收器操作特征曲线下面积 (AUC),通过改变窗口大小来获得曲线上的点。我们按照来源(FFS 与 MA)、试验臂(干预与对照)以及 STRIDE 的十个参与医疗系统对结果进行了分层。结果 有 4941 名(共 5451 名)参与者获得了参考标准数据和医疗保险数据。参考标准和算法分别识别出 2054 例和 2067 例 FIMA。该算法在同一日历月内识别参考标准 FIMA 的灵敏度为 45%(95% 置信区间 [CI],43%-47%),特异度为 99%(95% 置信区间 [CI],99%-99%)。AUC为0.79(95% CI,0.78-0.81),与FFS或MA数据源或试验臂相似,但在STRIDE医疗系统之间存在差异(医疗系统的AUC范围为0.71至0.84)。结论 在 MA 和 FFS 数据中,ICD-10-CM 算法识别跌倒损伤的性能与外部参考标准相比是可以接受的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Does sleep moderate the effects of exercise training or complex mental and social activities on cognitive function in adults with chronic stroke? Secondary analysis of a randomized trial The influence of body mass index on biomarkers of cellular senescence in older adults Late-onset caloric restriction improves cognitive performance and restores circadian patterns of neurotrophic, clock and epigenetic factors in the hippocampus of male old rats Longitudinal Changes in Peak Expiratory Flow Predict Risk for Incident Dementia Association between TTV viremia, chronic inflammation, and ischemic heart disease risk: Insights from MARK-AGE and Report-Age projects
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1