在丹麦国家患者登记中阑尾炎、阑尾切除术和诊断性腹腔镜编码的有效性。

IF 2.5 3区 医学 Q1 SURGERY Scandinavian Journal of Surgery Pub Date : 2023-03-01 DOI:10.1177/14574969221148078
Siv Fonnes, Rune Erichsen, Jacob Rosenberg
{"title":"在丹麦国家患者登记中阑尾炎、阑尾切除术和诊断性腹腔镜编码的有效性。","authors":"Siv Fonnes,&nbsp;Rune Erichsen,&nbsp;Jacob Rosenberg","doi":"10.1177/14574969221148078","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background and objective: </strong>We aimed to validate the diagnostic accuracy of appendicitis, its severity, its description, and the surgical approach, including open or laparoscopic appendectomy and diagnostic laparoscopy, in the Danish National Patient Registry (DNPR) against information from the electronic medical records.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A random sample of 1046 patients of all ages and sexes recorded in the DNPR from the Capital Region of Denmark during 2010-2015 was investigated. Patients' admission had to include a discharge code for appendicitis (K35-K379) according to the International Classification of Disease version 10 (ICD-10) alone or in combination with a surgical code for appendectomy or the surgical code for a diagnostic laparoscopy. We calculated the positive predictive values (PPVs) with 95% confidence intervals.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Data from a total of 1018 patients were available for data analysis. The ICD-10 codes for appendicitis resulted in a good PPV of >95% when combined with a surgical code. ICD-10 codes combined with the surgical codes could discriminate between uncomplicated and complicated appendicitis with some caution as the PPVs ranged from 68% to 93%. Only the surgical code for laparoscopic appendectomy yielded a good PPV (99%) for the actual surgical approach. The surgical code for a diagnostic laparoscopy alone did not cover a normal diagnostic laparoscopy.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The diagnostic accuracy of appendicitis and appendectomy in routinely collected administrative health data is good for ICD-10 codes for appendicitis in combination with a surgical code and especially for laparoscopic appendectomy. Uncomplicated and complicated appendicitis can be distinguished with some caution.</p>","PeriodicalId":49566,"journal":{"name":"Scandinavian Journal of Surgery","volume":"112 1","pages":"48-55"},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Validity of the coding for appendicitis, appendectomy, and diagnostic laparoscopy in the Danish National Patient Registry.\",\"authors\":\"Siv Fonnes,&nbsp;Rune Erichsen,&nbsp;Jacob Rosenberg\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/14574969221148078\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background and objective: </strong>We aimed to validate the diagnostic accuracy of appendicitis, its severity, its description, and the surgical approach, including open or laparoscopic appendectomy and diagnostic laparoscopy, in the Danish National Patient Registry (DNPR) against information from the electronic medical records.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A random sample of 1046 patients of all ages and sexes recorded in the DNPR from the Capital Region of Denmark during 2010-2015 was investigated. Patients' admission had to include a discharge code for appendicitis (K35-K379) according to the International Classification of Disease version 10 (ICD-10) alone or in combination with a surgical code for appendectomy or the surgical code for a diagnostic laparoscopy. We calculated the positive predictive values (PPVs) with 95% confidence intervals.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Data from a total of 1018 patients were available for data analysis. The ICD-10 codes for appendicitis resulted in a good PPV of >95% when combined with a surgical code. ICD-10 codes combined with the surgical codes could discriminate between uncomplicated and complicated appendicitis with some caution as the PPVs ranged from 68% to 93%. Only the surgical code for laparoscopic appendectomy yielded a good PPV (99%) for the actual surgical approach. The surgical code for a diagnostic laparoscopy alone did not cover a normal diagnostic laparoscopy.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The diagnostic accuracy of appendicitis and appendectomy in routinely collected administrative health data is good for ICD-10 codes for appendicitis in combination with a surgical code and especially for laparoscopic appendectomy. Uncomplicated and complicated appendicitis can be distinguished with some caution.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":49566,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Scandinavian Journal of Surgery\",\"volume\":\"112 1\",\"pages\":\"48-55\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-03-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Scandinavian Journal of Surgery\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/14574969221148078\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"SURGERY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Scandinavian Journal of Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/14574969221148078","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

背景和目的:我们旨在验证丹麦国家患者登记处(DNPR)中阑尾炎诊断的准确性、其严重程度、描述和手术入路,包括开放或腹腔镜阑尾切除术和诊断性腹腔镜手术,对照电子病历信息。方法:随机抽取2010-2015年丹麦首都地区DNPR记录的1046例不同年龄和性别的患者进行调查。根据国际疾病分类第10版(ICD-10),患者入院必须包括一个阑尾炎的出院代码(K35-K379),单独或与阑尾切除术的手术代码或诊断性腹腔镜手术代码相结合。我们以95%的置信区间计算阳性预测值(ppv)。结果:共有1018例患者的数据可用于数据分析。ICD-10阑尾炎编码与外科编码相结合,PPV >95%。ICD-10代码结合手术代码可以区分非复杂性和复杂性阑尾炎,但ppv范围为68%至93%。只有腹腔镜阑尾切除术的手术代码在实际手术入路中产生了良好的PPV(99%)。诊断性腹腔镜的手术代码单独不包括正常的诊断性腹腔镜。结论:ICD-10阑尾炎编码结合手术编码对阑尾炎和阑尾切除术的诊断准确率较高,尤其是腹腔镜阑尾切除术。简单阑尾炎和复杂阑尾炎可谨慎区分。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Validity of the coding for appendicitis, appendectomy, and diagnostic laparoscopy in the Danish National Patient Registry.

Background and objective: We aimed to validate the diagnostic accuracy of appendicitis, its severity, its description, and the surgical approach, including open or laparoscopic appendectomy and diagnostic laparoscopy, in the Danish National Patient Registry (DNPR) against information from the electronic medical records.

Methods: A random sample of 1046 patients of all ages and sexes recorded in the DNPR from the Capital Region of Denmark during 2010-2015 was investigated. Patients' admission had to include a discharge code for appendicitis (K35-K379) according to the International Classification of Disease version 10 (ICD-10) alone or in combination with a surgical code for appendectomy or the surgical code for a diagnostic laparoscopy. We calculated the positive predictive values (PPVs) with 95% confidence intervals.

Results: Data from a total of 1018 patients were available for data analysis. The ICD-10 codes for appendicitis resulted in a good PPV of >95% when combined with a surgical code. ICD-10 codes combined with the surgical codes could discriminate between uncomplicated and complicated appendicitis with some caution as the PPVs ranged from 68% to 93%. Only the surgical code for laparoscopic appendectomy yielded a good PPV (99%) for the actual surgical approach. The surgical code for a diagnostic laparoscopy alone did not cover a normal diagnostic laparoscopy.

Conclusions: The diagnostic accuracy of appendicitis and appendectomy in routinely collected administrative health data is good for ICD-10 codes for appendicitis in combination with a surgical code and especially for laparoscopic appendectomy. Uncomplicated and complicated appendicitis can be distinguished with some caution.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.50
自引率
4.20%
发文量
37
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: The Scandinavian Journal of Surgery (SJS) is the official peer reviewed journal of the Finnish Surgical Society and the Scandinavian Surgical Society. It publishes original and review articles from all surgical fields and specialties to reflect the interests of our diverse and international readership that consists of surgeons from all specialties and continents.
期刊最新文献
A randomized double-blind noninferiority clinical multicenter trial on oral moxifloxacin versus placebo in the outpatient treatment of uncomplicated acute appendicitis: APPAC IV study protocol. Modern surgical treatments for lymphedema. Impact of oral administration of calcitriol to prevent symptomatic hypocalcemia after total thyroidectomy: Systematic review and meta-analysis. 16-year outcomes of blunt thoracic aortic injury treated with thoracic endovascular aortic repair: A single-institution experience. Reducing the risk of cancer with bariatric surgery: The need for evidence to guide practice.
×
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