院外和院内心脏骤停算法在丹麦国家患者登记处的有效性。

IF 2.4 Q3 CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE Resuscitation plus Pub Date : 2025-01-01 Epub Date: 2024-12-28 DOI:10.1016/j.resplu.2024.100856
Katrine D. Brodersen , Søren R. Petersen , Kasper Bonnesen , Christian J. Terkelsen , Morten Schmidt
{"title":"院外和院内心脏骤停算法在丹麦国家患者登记处的有效性。","authors":"Katrine D. Brodersen ,&nbsp;Søren R. Petersen ,&nbsp;Kasper Bonnesen ,&nbsp;Christian J. Terkelsen ,&nbsp;Morten Schmidt","doi":"10.1016/j.resplu.2024.100856","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Aims</h3><div>Cardiac arrest is registered in the Danish National Patient Registry (DNPR) with the International Classification of Diseases 10<sup>th</sup> revision code I46. However, it does not distinguish between out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) and in-hospital cardiac arrest (IHCA). We validated an algorithm to identify cardiac arrest subtypes (out-of-hospital vs. in-hospital).</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>From Aarhus University Hospital, Denmark, we sampled patients with a primary or secondary cardiac arrest discharge diagnosis during 2019–2023. The algorithm categorized these patients as OHCA if they (1) only had a single department course during their hospitalization or (2) had multiple department courses during their hospitalization but were discharged with a cardiac arrest diagnosis from the first department course. The algorithm categorized the remaining patients as IHCA. We randomly sampled 200 patients with algorithm-based OHCA (<em>n</em> = 100) and IHCA (<em>n</em> = 100). Using medical record review as the reference, we calculated positive predictive values (PPVs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs).</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Cardiac arrest was confirmed in 192 of 200 cases, yielding a PPV for cardiac arrest overall of 96% (95% CI: 92–98%). The PPV was 87% (95% CI: 79–92%) for OHCA and 61% (95% CI: 51–70%) for IHCA. The results were robust in age and sex strata.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>The validity of a cardiac arrest diagnosis in the DNPR was overall high. The algorithm to distinguish cardiac arrest subtypes showed a high PPV for OHCA but a poor PPV for IHCA.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":94192,"journal":{"name":"Resuscitation plus","volume":"21 ","pages":"Article 100856"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11780140/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Validity of out-of-hospital and in-hospital cardiac arrest algorithms in the Danish National Patient Registry\",\"authors\":\"Katrine D. Brodersen ,&nbsp;Søren R. Petersen ,&nbsp;Kasper Bonnesen ,&nbsp;Christian J. Terkelsen ,&nbsp;Morten Schmidt\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.resplu.2024.100856\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Aims</h3><div>Cardiac arrest is registered in the Danish National Patient Registry (DNPR) with the International Classification of Diseases 10<sup>th</sup> revision code I46. However, it does not distinguish between out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) and in-hospital cardiac arrest (IHCA). We validated an algorithm to identify cardiac arrest subtypes (out-of-hospital vs. in-hospital).</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>From Aarhus University Hospital, Denmark, we sampled patients with a primary or secondary cardiac arrest discharge diagnosis during 2019–2023. The algorithm categorized these patients as OHCA if they (1) only had a single department course during their hospitalization or (2) had multiple department courses during their hospitalization but were discharged with a cardiac arrest diagnosis from the first department course. The algorithm categorized the remaining patients as IHCA. We randomly sampled 200 patients with algorithm-based OHCA (<em>n</em> = 100) and IHCA (<em>n</em> = 100). Using medical record review as the reference, we calculated positive predictive values (PPVs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs).</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Cardiac arrest was confirmed in 192 of 200 cases, yielding a PPV for cardiac arrest overall of 96% (95% CI: 92–98%). The PPV was 87% (95% CI: 79–92%) for OHCA and 61% (95% CI: 51–70%) for IHCA. The results were robust in age and sex strata.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>The validity of a cardiac arrest diagnosis in the DNPR was overall high. The algorithm to distinguish cardiac arrest subtypes showed a high PPV for OHCA but a poor PPV for IHCA.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":94192,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Resuscitation plus\",\"volume\":\"21 \",\"pages\":\"Article 100856\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11780140/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Resuscitation plus\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666520424003072\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/12/28 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Resuscitation plus","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666520424003072","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/12/28 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:心脏骤停在丹麦国家患者登记处(DNPR)登记,国际疾病分类第十次修订代码为I46。然而,它不区分院外心脏骤停(OHCA)和院内心脏骤停(IHCA)。我们验证了一种识别心脏骤停亚型(院外与院内)的算法。方法:来自丹麦奥胡斯大学医院,我们抽样了2019-2023年期间原发性或继发性心脏骤停出院诊断的患者。该算法将以下患者分类为OHCA:(1)在住院期间只有一个科室疗程,或(2)在住院期间有多个科室疗程,但在第一个科室疗程中诊断出心脏骤停出院。该算法将剩余的患者分类为IHCA。我们随机抽取200例基于算法的OHCA (n = 100)和IHCA (n = 100)患者。以病历回顾为参考,我们以95%置信区间(ci)计算阳性预测值(ppv)。结果:200例患者中有192例确认心脏骤停,产生的心脏骤停PPV总体为96% (95% CI: 92-98%)。OHCA的PPV为87% (95% CI: 79-92%), IHCA的PPV为61% (95% CI: 51-70%)。结果在年龄和性别阶层上都是可靠的。结论:DNPR中心脏骤停诊断的有效性总体较高。区分心脏骤停亚型的算法显示OHCA的PPV高,IHCA的PPV低。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

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 out-of-hospital and in-hospital cardiac arrest algorithms in the Danish National Patient Registry

Aims

Cardiac arrest is registered in the Danish National Patient Registry (DNPR) with the International Classification of Diseases 10th revision code I46. However, it does not distinguish between out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) and in-hospital cardiac arrest (IHCA). We validated an algorithm to identify cardiac arrest subtypes (out-of-hospital vs. in-hospital).

Methods

From Aarhus University Hospital, Denmark, we sampled patients with a primary or secondary cardiac arrest discharge diagnosis during 2019–2023. The algorithm categorized these patients as OHCA if they (1) only had a single department course during their hospitalization or (2) had multiple department courses during their hospitalization but were discharged with a cardiac arrest diagnosis from the first department course. The algorithm categorized the remaining patients as IHCA. We randomly sampled 200 patients with algorithm-based OHCA (n = 100) and IHCA (n = 100). Using medical record review as the reference, we calculated positive predictive values (PPVs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs).

Results

Cardiac arrest was confirmed in 192 of 200 cases, yielding a PPV for cardiac arrest overall of 96% (95% CI: 92–98%). The PPV was 87% (95% CI: 79–92%) for OHCA and 61% (95% CI: 51–70%) for IHCA. The results were robust in age and sex strata.

Conclusions

The validity of a cardiac arrest diagnosis in the DNPR was overall high. The algorithm to distinguish cardiac arrest subtypes showed a high PPV for OHCA but a poor PPV for IHCA.
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
Resuscitation plus
Resuscitation plus Critical Care and Intensive Care Medicine, Emergency Medicine
CiteScore
3.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
52 days
期刊最新文献
Young ERC Resuscitation Science Masterclass Journal Club article: the ARREST trial Preparedness deserts: a framework for understanding and addressing geographic inequities in bystander response to out-of-hospital cardiac arrest Patient and arrest characteristics associated with rearrest and mortality following out of hospital cardiac arrest Characterization of external defibrillator output and its impact on defibrillation protection of medical equipment Corrective steps during neonatal mask ventilation – a narrative review of the evidence behind the MR SOPA acronym
×
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学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
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