{"title":"利用全国队列中的管理数据识别原发性胆汁性胆管炎和肝硬化患者。","authors":"Binu V John, Dustin Bastaich, Bassam Dahman","doi":"10.1002/pds.70013","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The accuracy of administrative codes to capture patients with both primary biliary cholangitis (PBC) and cirrhosis could be challenging because of the potential for incorrect coding due to the old nomenclature \"Primary Biliary Cirrhosis.\" Therefore, the aim of this study was to examine the positive predictive value (PPV) of International Classification of Diseases (ICD) codes for PBC and cirrhosis.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This was a retrospective cohort study using data from the VA Corporate Data Warehouse. Eligibility criteria included adult patients diagnosed to have PBC and cirrhosis based on one inpatient or two outpatient ICD 9 or 10 codes, and were validated against chart review of each participant.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We identified 1408 patients who were found to have ICD codes for both cirrhosis and PBC. The ICD 9/10 codes for PBC and cirrhosis had a PPV of 0.75 (95% CI 0.73-0.75) for cirrhosis, 0.75 for PBC (95% CI 0.73-0.78), and 0.52 (0.50-0.55) for PBC and cirrhosis. When portal hypertension was combined with ICD 9/10 codes, the PPV of cirrhosis improved to 0.92 (0.90-0.94), and that of PBC cirrhosis improved to 0.64 (0.60-0.67). By combining ICD 9/10 codes for portal hypertension and receipt of ursodeoxycholic acid (UDCA), the PPV for cirrhosis improved to 0.91 (0.88-0.94), PBC increased to 0.78 (0.74-0.82), and that for PBC cirrhosis to 0.69 (0.65-0.74).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>In a large national cohort, the use of ICD 9/10 codes had modest reliability for identifying participants with PBC and cirrhosis. The PPV for cirrhosis can be improved by incorporating ICD 9/10 codes for portal hypertension with receipt of UDCA.</p>","PeriodicalId":19782,"journal":{"name":"Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety","volume":"33 10","pages":"e70013"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Identifying Patients With Primary Biliary Cholangitis and Cirrhosis Using Administrative Data in a National Cohort.\",\"authors\":\"Binu V John, Dustin Bastaich, Bassam Dahman\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/pds.70013\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The accuracy of administrative codes to capture patients with both primary biliary cholangitis (PBC) and cirrhosis could be challenging because of the potential for incorrect coding due to the old nomenclature \\\"Primary Biliary Cirrhosis.\\\" Therefore, the aim of this study was to examine the positive predictive value (PPV) of International Classification of Diseases (ICD) codes for PBC and cirrhosis.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This was a retrospective cohort study using data from the VA Corporate Data Warehouse. Eligibility criteria included adult patients diagnosed to have PBC and cirrhosis based on one inpatient or two outpatient ICD 9 or 10 codes, and were validated against chart review of each participant.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We identified 1408 patients who were found to have ICD codes for both cirrhosis and PBC. The ICD 9/10 codes for PBC and cirrhosis had a PPV of 0.75 (95% CI 0.73-0.75) for cirrhosis, 0.75 for PBC (95% CI 0.73-0.78), and 0.52 (0.50-0.55) for PBC and cirrhosis. When portal hypertension was combined with ICD 9/10 codes, the PPV of cirrhosis improved to 0.92 (0.90-0.94), and that of PBC cirrhosis improved to 0.64 (0.60-0.67). By combining ICD 9/10 codes for portal hypertension and receipt of ursodeoxycholic acid (UDCA), the PPV for cirrhosis improved to 0.91 (0.88-0.94), PBC increased to 0.78 (0.74-0.82), and that for PBC cirrhosis to 0.69 (0.65-0.74).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>In a large national cohort, the use of ICD 9/10 codes had modest reliability for identifying participants with PBC and cirrhosis. The PPV for cirrhosis can be improved by incorporating ICD 9/10 codes for portal hypertension with receipt of UDCA.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":19782,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety\",\"volume\":\"33 10\",\"pages\":\"e70013\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1002/pds.70013\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/pds.70013","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Identifying Patients With Primary Biliary Cholangitis and Cirrhosis Using Administrative Data in a National Cohort.
Background: The accuracy of administrative codes to capture patients with both primary biliary cholangitis (PBC) and cirrhosis could be challenging because of the potential for incorrect coding due to the old nomenclature "Primary Biliary Cirrhosis." Therefore, the aim of this study was to examine the positive predictive value (PPV) of International Classification of Diseases (ICD) codes for PBC and cirrhosis.
Methods: This was a retrospective cohort study using data from the VA Corporate Data Warehouse. Eligibility criteria included adult patients diagnosed to have PBC and cirrhosis based on one inpatient or two outpatient ICD 9 or 10 codes, and were validated against chart review of each participant.
Results: We identified 1408 patients who were found to have ICD codes for both cirrhosis and PBC. The ICD 9/10 codes for PBC and cirrhosis had a PPV of 0.75 (95% CI 0.73-0.75) for cirrhosis, 0.75 for PBC (95% CI 0.73-0.78), and 0.52 (0.50-0.55) for PBC and cirrhosis. When portal hypertension was combined with ICD 9/10 codes, the PPV of cirrhosis improved to 0.92 (0.90-0.94), and that of PBC cirrhosis improved to 0.64 (0.60-0.67). By combining ICD 9/10 codes for portal hypertension and receipt of ursodeoxycholic acid (UDCA), the PPV for cirrhosis improved to 0.91 (0.88-0.94), PBC increased to 0.78 (0.74-0.82), and that for PBC cirrhosis to 0.69 (0.65-0.74).
Conclusions: In a large national cohort, the use of ICD 9/10 codes had modest reliability for identifying participants with PBC and cirrhosis. The PPV for cirrhosis can be improved by incorporating ICD 9/10 codes for portal hypertension with receipt of UDCA.
期刊介绍:
The aim of Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety is to provide an international forum for the communication and evaluation of data, methods and opinion in the discipline of pharmacoepidemiology. The Journal publishes peer-reviewed reports of original research, invited reviews and a variety of guest editorials and commentaries embracing scientific, medical, statistical, legal and economic aspects of pharmacoepidemiology and post-marketing surveillance of drug safety. Appropriate material in these categories may also be considered for publication as a Brief Report.
Particular areas of interest include:
design, analysis, results, and interpretation of studies looking at the benefit or safety of specific pharmaceuticals, biologics, or medical devices, including studies in pharmacovigilance, postmarketing surveillance, pharmacoeconomics, patient safety, molecular pharmacoepidemiology, or any other study within the broad field of pharmacoepidemiology;
comparative effectiveness research relating to pharmaceuticals, biologics, and medical devices. Comparative effectiveness research is the generation and synthesis of evidence that compares the benefits and harms of alternative methods to prevent, diagnose, treat, and monitor a clinical condition, as these methods are truly used in the real world;
methodologic contributions of relevance to pharmacoepidemiology, whether original contributions, reviews of existing methods, or tutorials for how to apply the methods of pharmacoepidemiology;
assessments of harm versus benefit in drug therapy;
patterns of drug utilization;
relationships between pharmacoepidemiology and the formulation and interpretation of regulatory guidelines;
evaluations of risk management plans and programmes relating to pharmaceuticals, biologics and medical devices.