Physician-clinical coder collaboration effectively improves coding accuracy: A single-centre prospective study in China.

Yicong Xu, Huanbing Zhu, Zhijun Xu, Fanying Jin, Jing Chen, Xuanliang Pan, Dong Cai, Shengdong Pan
{"title":"Physician-clinical coder collaboration effectively improves coding accuracy: A single-centre prospective study in China.","authors":"Yicong Xu, Huanbing Zhu, Zhijun Xu, Fanying Jin, Jing Chen, Xuanliang Pan, Dong Cai, Shengdong Pan","doi":"10.1177/18333583241302402","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Background:</b> Clinical coding is important for reimbursement, resource planning, administration and medical research. <b>Objective:</b> This study aimed to evaluate clinical coding accuracy and its influencing factors, especially the benefits of physician-clinical coder collaboration. <b>Method:</b> Twenty-four physicians and one senior clinical coder participated in the quality audit. The audit checklist, assessment criteria, training program and physician-clinical coder collaboration mechanism were clearly defined. The homepage filling standards, homepage filling guidelines and the guidelines of the <i>International Classification of Diseases</i> were used as the assessment criteria for evaluating accuracy. <b>Results:</b> A total of 323,320 medical records were reviewed. The average accuracy of homepage completion was 60.4% and poor-quality homepages accounted for 89.9% of coding errors. The average coding accuracy and correction percentage were 83.4% and 62.3%, respectively. After physician-clinical coder collaboration, the coding accuracy increased from 78.9% to 87.1% (χ² = 799.904, <i>p</i> <i><</i> 0.001) and correction percentage increased from 52.0% to 73.0% (χ² = 1628.015, <i>p</i> <i><</i> 0.001). Multivariate logistic regression revealed that complexity of medical records (odds ratio (OR) = 0.625), quality of homepages (OR = 20.445), month of physician-clinical coder collaboration (OR = 1.133-2.297), coder's major (OR = 1.616), coding experience (OR = 1.953), work engagement (OR = 1.290) and day of the week (OR = 1.054) were factors influencing coding accuracy. <b>Conclusion:</b> Physician-clinical coder collaboration effectively improved clinical coding accuracy and clinical coders benefited greatly. However, homepage quality was not improved. Furthermore, homepage quality and psychological factors influenced coding accuracy. <b>Implications:</b> Managers should implement regular standardised training for homepage completion, alongside ongoing improvements in coding practices and training.</p>","PeriodicalId":73210,"journal":{"name":"Health information management : journal of the Health Information Management Association of Australia","volume":" ","pages":"18333583241302402"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health information management : journal of the Health Information Management Association of Australia","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/18333583241302402","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: Clinical coding is important for reimbursement, resource planning, administration and medical research. Objective: This study aimed to evaluate clinical coding accuracy and its influencing factors, especially the benefits of physician-clinical coder collaboration. Method: Twenty-four physicians and one senior clinical coder participated in the quality audit. The audit checklist, assessment criteria, training program and physician-clinical coder collaboration mechanism were clearly defined. The homepage filling standards, homepage filling guidelines and the guidelines of the International Classification of Diseases were used as the assessment criteria for evaluating accuracy. Results: A total of 323,320 medical records were reviewed. The average accuracy of homepage completion was 60.4% and poor-quality homepages accounted for 89.9% of coding errors. The average coding accuracy and correction percentage were 83.4% and 62.3%, respectively. After physician-clinical coder collaboration, the coding accuracy increased from 78.9% to 87.1% (χ² = 799.904, p< 0.001) and correction percentage increased from 52.0% to 73.0% (χ² = 1628.015, p< 0.001). Multivariate logistic regression revealed that complexity of medical records (odds ratio (OR) = 0.625), quality of homepages (OR = 20.445), month of physician-clinical coder collaboration (OR = 1.133-2.297), coder's major (OR = 1.616), coding experience (OR = 1.953), work engagement (OR = 1.290) and day of the week (OR = 1.054) were factors influencing coding accuracy. Conclusion: Physician-clinical coder collaboration effectively improved clinical coding accuracy and clinical coders benefited greatly. However, homepage quality was not improved. Furthermore, homepage quality and psychological factors influenced coding accuracy. Implications: Managers should implement regular standardised training for homepage completion, alongside ongoing improvements in coding practices and training.

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
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
Health information management students' work-integrated learning (professional practice placements): Where do they go and what do they do? Physician-clinical coder collaboration effectively improves coding accuracy: A single-centre prospective study in China. Physicians' acceptance and adoption of mobile health applications during the COVID-19 pandemic in Saudi Arabia: Extending the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology model. The health information management workforce: Looking to the future. Demystifying environmental health-related diseases: Using ICD codes to facilitate environmental health clinical referrals.
×
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