{"title":"ICD-11和ICD-10对住院病人发病率编码准确性的比较。","authors":"Javad Zarei, Reza Golpira, Nasim Hashemi, Zahra Azadmanjir, Zahra Meidani, Akram Vahedi, Hooman Bakhshandeh, Esmaeil Fakharian, Abbas Sheikhtaheri","doi":"10.1177/18333583231185355","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>One of the challenges when transitioning from International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems, 10th Revision (ICD-10) to International Classification of Diseases, 11th Revision (ICD-11) is to ensure clinical coding accuracy.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To determine the accuracy of clinical coding with ICD-11 in comparison with ICD-10 and identify causes of coding errors in real clinical coding environments.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>The study was conducted prospectively in two general hospitals. Medical records of discharged inpatients were coded by hospital clinical coders with both ICD-11 and ICD-10 on different days. These medical records were recoded by five mentors. Codes assigned by mentors were used as the gold standard for the evaluation of accuracy.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The accuracy of ICD-10 and ICD-11 coding for 1578 and 2168 codes was evaluated. Coding accuracy was 89.1% and 74.2% for ICD-10 and ICD-11. In ICD-11, the lowest accuracy was observed in chapters 22 (injuries), 10 (ear) and 11 (circulatory) (51.1%, 53.8% and 62.7%, respectively). In both ICD-10 and ICD-11, the most important cause of the coding errors was clinical coders' mistakes (79.5% and 81.8% for ICD-10 and ICD-11, respectively).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Accuracy of clinical coding with ICD-11 was lower relative to ICD-10. Hence, it is essential to carry out initial preparations, particularly the training of clinical coders based on their needs, as well as the necessary interventions to enhance the documentation of medical records according to ICD-11 before or simultaneous with the country-wide implementation.</p><p><strong>Implications: </strong>Clinical coders need complete training, especially in using extension codes and post-coordination coding. Local ICD-11 guidelines based on the needs of local users and reporting policies should be developed. Furthermore, documentation guidelines based on ICD-11 requirements should be developed.</p>","PeriodicalId":73210,"journal":{"name":"Health information management : journal of the Health Information Management Association of Australia","volume":" ","pages":"18333583231185355"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison of the accuracy of inpatient morbidity coding with ICD-11 and ICD-10.\",\"authors\":\"Javad Zarei, Reza Golpira, Nasim Hashemi, Zahra Azadmanjir, Zahra Meidani, Akram Vahedi, Hooman Bakhshandeh, Esmaeil Fakharian, Abbas Sheikhtaheri\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/18333583231185355\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>One of the challenges when transitioning from International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems, 10th Revision (ICD-10) to International Classification of Diseases, 11th Revision (ICD-11) is to ensure clinical coding accuracy.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To determine the accuracy of clinical coding with ICD-11 in comparison with ICD-10 and identify causes of coding errors in real clinical coding environments.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>The study was conducted prospectively in two general hospitals. Medical records of discharged inpatients were coded by hospital clinical coders with both ICD-11 and ICD-10 on different days. These medical records were recoded by five mentors. Codes assigned by mentors were used as the gold standard for the evaluation of accuracy.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The accuracy of ICD-10 and ICD-11 coding for 1578 and 2168 codes was evaluated. Coding accuracy was 89.1% and 74.2% for ICD-10 and ICD-11. In ICD-11, the lowest accuracy was observed in chapters 22 (injuries), 10 (ear) and 11 (circulatory) (51.1%, 53.8% and 62.7%, respectively). In both ICD-10 and ICD-11, the most important cause of the coding errors was clinical coders' mistakes (79.5% and 81.8% for ICD-10 and ICD-11, respectively).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Accuracy of clinical coding with ICD-11 was lower relative to ICD-10. Hence, it is essential to carry out initial preparations, particularly the training of clinical coders based on their needs, as well as the necessary interventions to enhance the documentation of medical records according to ICD-11 before or simultaneous with the country-wide implementation.</p><p><strong>Implications: </strong>Clinical coders need complete training, especially in using extension codes and post-coordination coding. Local ICD-11 guidelines based on the needs of local users and reporting policies should be developed. Furthermore, documentation guidelines based on ICD-11 requirements should be developed.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":73210,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Health information management : journal of the Health Information Management Association of Australia\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"18333583231185355\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-07-25\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Health information management : journal of the Health Information Management Association of Australia\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/18333583231185355\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health information management : journal of the Health Information Management Association of Australia","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/18333583231185355","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
Comparison of the accuracy of inpatient morbidity coding with ICD-11 and ICD-10.
Background: One of the challenges when transitioning from International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems, 10th Revision (ICD-10) to International Classification of Diseases, 11th Revision (ICD-11) is to ensure clinical coding accuracy.
Objective: To determine the accuracy of clinical coding with ICD-11 in comparison with ICD-10 and identify causes of coding errors in real clinical coding environments.
Method: The study was conducted prospectively in two general hospitals. Medical records of discharged inpatients were coded by hospital clinical coders with both ICD-11 and ICD-10 on different days. These medical records were recoded by five mentors. Codes assigned by mentors were used as the gold standard for the evaluation of accuracy.
Results: The accuracy of ICD-10 and ICD-11 coding for 1578 and 2168 codes was evaluated. Coding accuracy was 89.1% and 74.2% for ICD-10 and ICD-11. In ICD-11, the lowest accuracy was observed in chapters 22 (injuries), 10 (ear) and 11 (circulatory) (51.1%, 53.8% and 62.7%, respectively). In both ICD-10 and ICD-11, the most important cause of the coding errors was clinical coders' mistakes (79.5% and 81.8% for ICD-10 and ICD-11, respectively).
Conclusion: Accuracy of clinical coding with ICD-11 was lower relative to ICD-10. Hence, it is essential to carry out initial preparations, particularly the training of clinical coders based on their needs, as well as the necessary interventions to enhance the documentation of medical records according to ICD-11 before or simultaneous with the country-wide implementation.
Implications: Clinical coders need complete training, especially in using extension codes and post-coordination coding. Local ICD-11 guidelines based on the needs of local users and reporting policies should be developed. Furthermore, documentation guidelines based on ICD-11 requirements should be developed.