用于识别突发脑卒中的 ICD-10 编码的推导和验证。

IF 20.4 1区 医学 Q1 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY JAMA neurology Pub Date : 2024-08-01 DOI:10.1001/jamaneurol.2024.2044
Jesse A Columbo, Natalie Daya, Lisandro D Colantonio, Zhixin Wang, Kathryn Foti, Hyacinth I Hyacinth, Michelle C Johansen, Rebecca Gottesman, Phillip P Goodney, Virginia J Howard, Paul Muntner, Andrea L C Schneider, Elizabeth Selvin, Caitlin W Hicks
{"title":"用于识别突发脑卒中的 ICD-10 编码的推导和验证。","authors":"Jesse A Columbo, Natalie Daya, Lisandro D Colantonio, Zhixin Wang, Kathryn Foti, Hyacinth I Hyacinth, Michelle C Johansen, Rebecca Gottesman, Phillip P Goodney, Virginia J Howard, Paul Muntner, Andrea L C Schneider, Elizabeth Selvin, Caitlin W Hicks","doi":"10.1001/jamaneurol.2024.2044","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Importance: </strong>Claims data with International Statistical Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision (ICD-10) codes are routinely used in clinical research. However, the use of ICD-10 codes to define incident stroke has not been validated against expert-adjudicated outcomes in the US population.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To develop and validate the accuracy of an ICD-10 code list to detect incident stroke events using Medicare inpatient fee-for-service claims data.</p><p><strong>Design, setting, and participants: </strong>This cohort study used data from 2 prospective population-based cohort studies, the Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities (ARIC) study and the Reasons for Geographic and Racial Differences in Stroke (REGARDS) study, and included participants aged 65 years or older without prior stroke who had linked Medicare claims data. Stroke events in the ARIC and REGARDS studies were identified via active surveillance and adjudicated by expert review. Medicare-linked ARIC data (2016-2018) were used to develop a list of ICD-10 codes for incident stroke detection. The list was validated using Medicare-linked REGARDS data (2016-2019). Data were analyzed from September 1, 2022, through September 30, 2023.</p><p><strong>Exposures: </strong>Stroke events detected in Medicare claims vs expert-adjudicated stroke events in the ARIC and REGARDS studies.</p><p><strong>Main outcomes and measures: </strong>The main outcomes were sensitivity and specificity of incident stroke detection using ICD-10 codes.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In the ARIC study, there were 110 adjudicated incident stroke events among 5194 participants (mean [SD] age, 80.1 [5.3] years) over a median follow-up of 3.0 (range, 0.003-3.0) years. Most ARIC participants were women (3160 [60.8%]); 993 (19.1%) were Black and 4180 (80.5%) were White. Using the primary diagnosis code on a Medicare billing claim, the ICD-10 code list had a sensitivity of 81.8% (95% CI, 73.3%-88.5%) and a specificity of 99.1% (95% CI, 98.8%-99.3%) to detect incident stroke. Using any diagnosis code on a Medicare billing claim, the sensitivity was 94.5% (95% CI, 88.5%-98.0%) and the specificity was 98.4% (95% CI, 98.0%-98.8%). In the REGARDS study, there were 140 adjudicated incident strokes among 6359 participants (mean [SD] age, 75.8 [7.0] years) over a median follow-up of 4.0 (range, 0-4.0) years. More than half of the REGARDS participants were women (3351 [52.7%]); 1774 (27.9%) were Black and 4585 (72.1%) were White. For the primary diagnosis code, the ICD-10 code list had a sensitivity of 70.7% (95% CI, 63.2%-78.3%) and a specificity of 99.1% (95% CI, 98.9%-99.4%). For any diagnosis code, the ICD-10 code list had a sensitivity of 77.9% (95% CI, 71.0%-84.7%) and a specificity of 98.9% (95% CI, 98.6%-99.2%).</p><p><strong>Conclusions and relevance: </strong>These findings suggest that ICD-10 codes could be used to identify incident stroke events in Medicare claims with moderate sensitivity and high specificity.</p>","PeriodicalId":14677,"journal":{"name":"JAMA neurology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":20.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11217886/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Derivation and Validation of ICD-10 Codes for Identifying Incident Stroke.\",\"authors\":\"Jesse A Columbo, Natalie Daya, Lisandro D Colantonio, Zhixin Wang, Kathryn Foti, Hyacinth I Hyacinth, Michelle C Johansen, Rebecca Gottesman, Phillip P Goodney, Virginia J Howard, Paul Muntner, Andrea L C Schneider, Elizabeth Selvin, Caitlin W Hicks\",\"doi\":\"10.1001/jamaneurol.2024.2044\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Importance: </strong>Claims data with International Statistical Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision (ICD-10) codes are routinely used in clinical research. However, the use of ICD-10 codes to define incident stroke has not been validated against expert-adjudicated outcomes in the US population.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To develop and validate the accuracy of an ICD-10 code list to detect incident stroke events using Medicare inpatient fee-for-service claims data.</p><p><strong>Design, setting, and participants: </strong>This cohort study used data from 2 prospective population-based cohort studies, the Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities (ARIC) study and the Reasons for Geographic and Racial Differences in Stroke (REGARDS) study, and included participants aged 65 years or older without prior stroke who had linked Medicare claims data. Stroke events in the ARIC and REGARDS studies were identified via active surveillance and adjudicated by expert review. Medicare-linked ARIC data (2016-2018) were used to develop a list of ICD-10 codes for incident stroke detection. The list was validated using Medicare-linked REGARDS data (2016-2019). Data were analyzed from September 1, 2022, through September 30, 2023.</p><p><strong>Exposures: </strong>Stroke events detected in Medicare claims vs expert-adjudicated stroke events in the ARIC and REGARDS studies.</p><p><strong>Main outcomes and measures: </strong>The main outcomes were sensitivity and specificity of incident stroke detection using ICD-10 codes.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In the ARIC study, there were 110 adjudicated incident stroke events among 5194 participants (mean [SD] age, 80.1 [5.3] years) over a median follow-up of 3.0 (range, 0.003-3.0) years. Most ARIC participants were women (3160 [60.8%]); 993 (19.1%) were Black and 4180 (80.5%) were White. Using the primary diagnosis code on a Medicare billing claim, the ICD-10 code list had a sensitivity of 81.8% (95% CI, 73.3%-88.5%) and a specificity of 99.1% (95% CI, 98.8%-99.3%) to detect incident stroke. Using any diagnosis code on a Medicare billing claim, the sensitivity was 94.5% (95% CI, 88.5%-98.0%) and the specificity was 98.4% (95% CI, 98.0%-98.8%). In the REGARDS study, there were 140 adjudicated incident strokes among 6359 participants (mean [SD] age, 75.8 [7.0] years) over a median follow-up of 4.0 (range, 0-4.0) years. More than half of the REGARDS participants were women (3351 [52.7%]); 1774 (27.9%) were Black and 4585 (72.1%) were White. For the primary diagnosis code, the ICD-10 code list had a sensitivity of 70.7% (95% CI, 63.2%-78.3%) and a specificity of 99.1% (95% CI, 98.9%-99.4%). For any diagnosis code, the ICD-10 code list had a sensitivity of 77.9% (95% CI, 71.0%-84.7%) and a specificity of 98.9% (95% CI, 98.6%-99.2%).</p><p><strong>Conclusions and relevance: </strong>These findings suggest that ICD-10 codes could be used to identify incident stroke events in Medicare claims with moderate sensitivity and high specificity.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":14677,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"JAMA neurology\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":20.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11217886/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"JAMA neurology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1001/jamaneurol.2024.2044\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JAMA neurology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1001/jamaneurol.2024.2044","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

重要性:带有国际疾病统计分类第十次修订版(ICD-10)代码的索赔数据被常规用于临床研究。然而,在美国人群中,使用 ICD-10 编码来定义卒中事件还没有经过专家判断结果的验证:目的:利用医疗保险住院病人付费服务理赔数据,开发并验证 ICD-10 编码列表检测卒中事件的准确性:这项队列研究使用了两项基于人群的前瞻性队列研究数据,即社区动脉粥样硬化风险(ARIC)研究和中风的地理和种族差异原因(REGARDS)研究,研究对象包括年龄在 65 岁或以上、未发生过中风且拥有联保报销数据的参与者。ARIC 和 REGARDS 研究中的卒中事件是通过主动监测发现的,并由专家审查裁定。与医疗保险挂钩的 ARIC 数据(2016-2018 年)被用于制定用于检测卒中事件的 ICD-10 编码列表。该列表使用与医疗保险相关的 REGARDS 数据(2016-2019 年)进行验证。数据分析时间为 2022 年 9 月 1 日至 2023 年 9 月 30 日:医疗保险理赔中检测到的卒中事件与 ARIC 和 REGARDS 研究中专家判断的卒中事件:主要结果是使用 ICD-10 编码检测卒中事件的灵敏度和特异性:在 ARIC 研究中,5194 名参与者(平均 [SD] 年龄为 80.1 [5.3]岁)在 3.0(范围为 0.003-3.0)年的中位随访中发生了 110 例经专家判定的卒中事件。大多数 ARIC 参与者为女性(3160 [60.8%]);993(19.1%)人为黑人,4180(80.5%)人为白人。使用医疗保险账单上的主要诊断代码,ICD-10 代码列表检测卒中事件的灵敏度为 81.8%(95% CI,73.3%-88.5%),特异度为 99.1%(95% CI,98.8%-99.3%)。使用医疗保险账单上的任何诊断代码,灵敏度为 94.5%(95% CI,88.5%-98.0%),特异性为 98.4%(95% CI,98.0%-98.8%)。在 REGARDS 研究中,6359 名参与者(平均 [SD] 年龄为 75.8 [7.0] 岁)中有 140 例被判定为意外脑卒中,中位随访时间为 4.0 年(范围为 0-4.0)。超过一半的 REGARDS 参与者为女性(3351 人 [52.7%]);1774 人(27.9%)为黑人,4585 人(72.1%)为白人。对于主要诊断代码,ICD-10 代码列表的灵敏度为 70.7%(95% CI,63.2%-78.3%),特异性为 99.1%(95% CI,98.9%-99.4%)。对于任何诊断代码,ICD-10 代码列表的灵敏度为 77.9%(95% CI,71.0%-84.7%),特异性为 98.9%(95% CI,98.6%-99.2%):这些研究结果表明,ICD-10 代码可用于识别医疗保险报销单中的卒中事件,具有中等灵敏度和较高特异性。
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
Derivation and Validation of ICD-10 Codes for Identifying Incident Stroke.

Importance: Claims data with International Statistical Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision (ICD-10) codes are routinely used in clinical research. However, the use of ICD-10 codes to define incident stroke has not been validated against expert-adjudicated outcomes in the US population.

Objective: To develop and validate the accuracy of an ICD-10 code list to detect incident stroke events using Medicare inpatient fee-for-service claims data.

Design, setting, and participants: This cohort study used data from 2 prospective population-based cohort studies, the Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities (ARIC) study and the Reasons for Geographic and Racial Differences in Stroke (REGARDS) study, and included participants aged 65 years or older without prior stroke who had linked Medicare claims data. Stroke events in the ARIC and REGARDS studies were identified via active surveillance and adjudicated by expert review. Medicare-linked ARIC data (2016-2018) were used to develop a list of ICD-10 codes for incident stroke detection. The list was validated using Medicare-linked REGARDS data (2016-2019). Data were analyzed from September 1, 2022, through September 30, 2023.

Exposures: Stroke events detected in Medicare claims vs expert-adjudicated stroke events in the ARIC and REGARDS studies.

Main outcomes and measures: The main outcomes were sensitivity and specificity of incident stroke detection using ICD-10 codes.

Results: In the ARIC study, there were 110 adjudicated incident stroke events among 5194 participants (mean [SD] age, 80.1 [5.3] years) over a median follow-up of 3.0 (range, 0.003-3.0) years. Most ARIC participants were women (3160 [60.8%]); 993 (19.1%) were Black and 4180 (80.5%) were White. Using the primary diagnosis code on a Medicare billing claim, the ICD-10 code list had a sensitivity of 81.8% (95% CI, 73.3%-88.5%) and a specificity of 99.1% (95% CI, 98.8%-99.3%) to detect incident stroke. Using any diagnosis code on a Medicare billing claim, the sensitivity was 94.5% (95% CI, 88.5%-98.0%) and the specificity was 98.4% (95% CI, 98.0%-98.8%). In the REGARDS study, there were 140 adjudicated incident strokes among 6359 participants (mean [SD] age, 75.8 [7.0] years) over a median follow-up of 4.0 (range, 0-4.0) years. More than half of the REGARDS participants were women (3351 [52.7%]); 1774 (27.9%) were Black and 4585 (72.1%) were White. For the primary diagnosis code, the ICD-10 code list had a sensitivity of 70.7% (95% CI, 63.2%-78.3%) and a specificity of 99.1% (95% CI, 98.9%-99.4%). For any diagnosis code, the ICD-10 code list had a sensitivity of 77.9% (95% CI, 71.0%-84.7%) and a specificity of 98.9% (95% CI, 98.6%-99.2%).

Conclusions and relevance: These findings suggest that ICD-10 codes could be used to identify incident stroke events in Medicare claims with moderate sensitivity and high specificity.

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
JAMA neurology
JAMA neurology CLINICAL NEUROLOGY-
CiteScore
41.90
自引率
1.70%
发文量
250
期刊介绍: JAMA Neurology is an international peer-reviewed journal for physicians caring for people with neurologic disorders and those interested in the structure and function of the normal and diseased nervous system. The Archives of Neurology & Psychiatry began publication in 1919 and, in 1959, became 2 separate journals: Archives of Neurology and Archives of General Psychiatry. In 2013, their names changed to JAMA Neurology and JAMA Psychiatry, respectively. JAMA Neurology is a member of the JAMA Network, a consortium of peer-reviewed, general medical and specialty publications.
期刊最新文献
Frailty Trajectories Preceding Dementia in the US and UK Epileptiform Electrographic Patterns After Cardiac Arrest Deferiprone in Alzheimer Disease: A Randomized Clinical Trial. Immediate or Delayed Statin in Acute Atherosclerotic Ischemia. Immediate or Delayed Statin in Acute Atherosclerotic Ischemia-Reply.
×
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