Susan H Fenton, Cassandra Ciminello, Vickie M Mays, Mary H Stanfill, Valerie Watzlaf
{"title":"与ICD-9-CM相比,ICD-10-CM中门诊护理代码特异性使用的检查:对ICD-11实施的影响。","authors":"Susan H Fenton, Cassandra Ciminello, Vickie M Mays, Mary H Stanfill, Valerie Watzlaf","doi":"10.1093/jamia/ocaf003","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>The ICD-10-CM classification system contains more specificity than its predecessor ICD-9-CM. A stated reason for transitioning to ICD-10-CM was to increase the availability of detailed data. This study aims to determine whether the increased specificity contained in ICD-10-CM is utilized in the ambulatory care setting and inform an evidence-based approach to evaluate ICD-11 content for implementation planning in the United States.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>Diagnosis codes and text descriptions were extracted from a 25% random sample of the IQVIA Ambulatory EMR-US database for 2014 (ICD-9-CM, n = 14 327 155) and 2019 (ICD-10-CM, n = 13 062 900). Code utilization data was analyzed for the total and unique number of codes. Frequencies and tests of significance determined the percentage of available codes utilized and the unspecified code rates for both code sets in each year.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Only 44.6% of available ICD-10-CM codes were used compared to 91.5% of available ICD-9-CM codes. Of the total codes used, 14.5% ICD-9-CM codes were unspecified, while 33.3% ICD-10-CM codes were unspecified.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>Even though greater detail is available, a 108.5% increase in using unspecified codes with ICD-10-CM was found. The utilization data analyzed in this study does not support a rationale for the large increase in the number of codes in ICD-10-CM. New technologies and methods are likely needed to fully utilize detailed classification systems.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>These results help evaluate the content needed in the United States national ICD standard. This analysis of codes in the current ICD standard is important for ICD-11 evaluation, implementation, and use.</p>","PeriodicalId":50016,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"An examination of ambulatory care code specificity utilization in ICD-10-CM compared to ICD-9-CM: implications for ICD-11 implementation.\",\"authors\":\"Susan H Fenton, Cassandra Ciminello, Vickie M Mays, Mary H Stanfill, Valerie Watzlaf\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/jamia/ocaf003\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>The ICD-10-CM classification system contains more specificity than its predecessor ICD-9-CM. A stated reason for transitioning to ICD-10-CM was to increase the availability of detailed data. This study aims to determine whether the increased specificity contained in ICD-10-CM is utilized in the ambulatory care setting and inform an evidence-based approach to evaluate ICD-11 content for implementation planning in the United States.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>Diagnosis codes and text descriptions were extracted from a 25% random sample of the IQVIA Ambulatory EMR-US database for 2014 (ICD-9-CM, n = 14 327 155) and 2019 (ICD-10-CM, n = 13 062 900). Code utilization data was analyzed for the total and unique number of codes. Frequencies and tests of significance determined the percentage of available codes utilized and the unspecified code rates for both code sets in each year.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Only 44.6% of available ICD-10-CM codes were used compared to 91.5% of available ICD-9-CM codes. Of the total codes used, 14.5% ICD-9-CM codes were unspecified, while 33.3% ICD-10-CM codes were unspecified.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>Even though greater detail is available, a 108.5% increase in using unspecified codes with ICD-10-CM was found. The utilization data analyzed in this study does not support a rationale for the large increase in the number of codes in ICD-10-CM. New technologies and methods are likely needed to fully utilize detailed classification systems.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>These results help evaluate the content needed in the United States national ICD standard. This analysis of codes in the current ICD standard is important for ICD-11 evaluation, implementation, and use.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":50016,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-01-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"91\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/jamia/ocaf003\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"COMPUTER SCIENCE, INFORMATION SYSTEMS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jamia/ocaf003","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"COMPUTER SCIENCE, INFORMATION SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
目的:ICD-10-CM分类系统比其前身ICD-9-CM更具特异性。向ICD-10-CM过渡的一个明确原因是增加详细数据的可用性。本研究旨在确定ICD-10-CM中增加的特异性是否用于门诊护理环境,并为美国实施计划评估ICD-11内容的循证方法提供信息。材料和方法:从IQVIA动态EMR-US数据库2014年(ICD-9-CM, n = 14 327 155)和2019年(ICD-10-CM, n = 13 062 900)的25%随机样本中提取诊断代码和文本描述。对代码使用数据进行了分析,以确定代码的总数和唯一数量。频率和显著性测试决定了每年使用的可用代码的百分比和两个代码集的未指定代码率。结果:ICD-10-CM编码的使用率为44.6%,而ICD-9-CM编码的使用率为91.5%。在使用的全部编码中,14.5%的ICD-9-CM编码未明确,33.3%的ICD-10-CM编码未明确。讨论:尽管有更多的细节,但发现使用未指定代码的ICD-10-CM增加了108.5%。本研究分析的利用数据不支持ICD-10-CM中代码数量大量增加的基本原理。可能需要新的技术和方法来充分利用详细的分类系统。结论:这些结果有助于评估美国ICD国家标准所需的内容。对现行ICD标准中代码的分析对于ICD-11的评估、实施和使用非常重要。
An examination of ambulatory care code specificity utilization in ICD-10-CM compared to ICD-9-CM: implications for ICD-11 implementation.
Objective: The ICD-10-CM classification system contains more specificity than its predecessor ICD-9-CM. A stated reason for transitioning to ICD-10-CM was to increase the availability of detailed data. This study aims to determine whether the increased specificity contained in ICD-10-CM is utilized in the ambulatory care setting and inform an evidence-based approach to evaluate ICD-11 content for implementation planning in the United States.
Materials and methods: Diagnosis codes and text descriptions were extracted from a 25% random sample of the IQVIA Ambulatory EMR-US database for 2014 (ICD-9-CM, n = 14 327 155) and 2019 (ICD-10-CM, n = 13 062 900). Code utilization data was analyzed for the total and unique number of codes. Frequencies and tests of significance determined the percentage of available codes utilized and the unspecified code rates for both code sets in each year.
Results: Only 44.6% of available ICD-10-CM codes were used compared to 91.5% of available ICD-9-CM codes. Of the total codes used, 14.5% ICD-9-CM codes were unspecified, while 33.3% ICD-10-CM codes were unspecified.
Discussion: Even though greater detail is available, a 108.5% increase in using unspecified codes with ICD-10-CM was found. The utilization data analyzed in this study does not support a rationale for the large increase in the number of codes in ICD-10-CM. New technologies and methods are likely needed to fully utilize detailed classification systems.
Conclusion: These results help evaluate the content needed in the United States national ICD standard. This analysis of codes in the current ICD standard is important for ICD-11 evaluation, implementation, and use.
期刊介绍:
JAMIA is AMIA''s premier peer-reviewed journal for biomedical and health informatics. Covering the full spectrum of activities in the field, JAMIA includes informatics articles in the areas of clinical care, clinical research, translational science, implementation science, imaging, education, consumer health, public health, and policy. JAMIA''s articles describe innovative informatics research and systems that help to advance biomedical science and to promote health. Case reports, perspectives and reviews also help readers stay connected with the most important informatics developments in implementation, policy and education.