Validation of algorithms to identify elective percutaneous coronary interventions in administrative databases
Elective percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI) are difficult to discriminate from non-elective PCI in administrative data due to non-specific encounter codes, limiting the ability to track outcomes, ensure appropriate medical management, and/or perform research on patients who undergo elective P...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | PloS one 2020-04, Vol.15 (4), p.e0231100-e0231100 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | e0231100 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 4 |
| container_start_page | e0231100 |
| container_title | PloS one |
| container_volume | 15 |
| creator | Derington, Catherine G Heath, Lauren J Kao, David P Delate, Thomas |
| description | Elective percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI) are difficult to discriminate from non-elective PCI in administrative data due to non-specific encounter codes, limiting the ability to track outcomes, ensure appropriate medical management, and/or perform research on patients who undergo elective PCI. The objective of this study was to assess the abilities of several algorithms to identify elective PCI procedures using administrative data containing diagnostic, utilization, and/or procedural codes.
For this retrospective study, administrative databases in an integrated healthcare delivery system were queried between 1/1/2015 and 6/31/2016 to identify patients who had an encounter for a PCI. Using clinical criteria, each encounter was classified via chart review as a valid PCI, then as elective or non-elective. Cases were tested against nine pre-determined algorithms. Performance statistics (sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value) and associated 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated. Of 521 PCI encounters reviewed, 497 were valid PCI, 93 of which were elective. An algorithm that excluded emergency room visit events had the highest sensitivity (97.9%, 95%CI 92.5%-99.7%) while an algorithm that included events occurring within 90 days of a cardiologist visit and coronary angiogram or stress test had the highest positive predictive value (62.2%, 95%CI 50.8%-72.7%).
Without an encounter code specific for elective PCI, an algorithm excluding procedures associated with an emergency room visit had the highest sensitivity to identify elective PCI. This offers a reasonable approach to identify elective PCI from administrative data. |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1371/journal.pone.0231100 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>gale_plos_</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_plos_journals_2387242658</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><galeid>A619705663</galeid><doaj_id>oai_doaj_org_article_2b8d0ebdd67e489ca045af76ef7df41d</doaj_id><sourcerecordid>A619705663</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c692t-25ba88060166b36a53ca40b7775d0c1a61c341774a2fa597304145f2d86ee0a3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNk11r2zAUhs3YWLts_2BshsHYLpLpw5Kcm0Ip-wgUClvprTiW5ERBtjJJDuu_n_LREo9eDF_Ilp73lc8rnaJ4i9EMU4G_rP0QenCzje_NDBGKMULPinM8p2TKCaLPT97PilcxrhFitOb8ZXFGCWGsRvS86O7AWQ3J-r70bQlu6YNNqy6WyZdWmz7Z9r40zqhkt6bcmKCGBL3xQyyVD76HcF_aPpmw3bG-j_mrBN3Z3sYUYK_K_tBANPF18aIFF82b4zgpbr99vb36Mb2--b64uryeKj4naUpYA3WNOMKcN5QDowoq1AghmEYKA8eKVliICkgLbC4oqnDFWqJrbgwCOineH2w3zkd5DCpKQmtBKsJZnYnFgdAe1nITbJfrkB6s3E_4sJQQklXOSNLUGplGay5MVc8VoIpBK7hphW4rrLPXxXG3oemMVjmHAG5kOl7p7Uou_VYKTGuaz2hSfDoaBP97MDHJzkZlnDvkvP9vznIyIqMf_kGfru5ILSEXYPvW533VzlRecjwXiHFOMzV7gsqPNp1V-Va1Ns-PBJ9Hgswk8yctYYhRLn79_H_25m7MfjxhVwZcWkXvhv11GoPVAVTBxxhM-xgyRnLXFA9pyF1TyGNTZNm70wN6FD10Af0LqRkJNA</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Website</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2387242658</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Validation of algorithms to identify elective percutaneous coronary interventions in administrative databases</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Full-Text Journals in Chemistry (Open access)</source><source>Directory of Open Access Journals</source><source>PubMed Central (Open Access)</source><source>Public Library of Science</source><source>EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals</source><creator>Derington, Catherine G ; Heath, Lauren J ; Kao, David P ; Delate, Thomas</creator><contributor>den Uil, Corstiaan</contributor><creatorcontrib>Derington, Catherine G ; Heath, Lauren J ; Kao, David P ; Delate, Thomas ; den Uil, Corstiaan</creatorcontrib><description>Elective percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI) are difficult to discriminate from non-elective PCI in administrative data due to non-specific encounter codes, limiting the ability to track outcomes, ensure appropriate medical management, and/or perform research on patients who undergo elective PCI. The objective of this study was to assess the abilities of several algorithms to identify elective PCI procedures using administrative data containing diagnostic, utilization, and/or procedural codes.
For this retrospective study, administrative databases in an integrated healthcare delivery system were queried between 1/1/2015 and 6/31/2016 to identify patients who had an encounter for a PCI. Using clinical criteria, each encounter was classified via chart review as a valid PCI, then as elective or non-elective. Cases were tested against nine pre-determined algorithms. Performance statistics (sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value) and associated 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated. Of 521 PCI encounters reviewed, 497 were valid PCI, 93 of which were elective. An algorithm that excluded emergency room visit events had the highest sensitivity (97.9%, 95%CI 92.5%-99.7%) while an algorithm that included events occurring within 90 days of a cardiologist visit and coronary angiogram or stress test had the highest positive predictive value (62.2%, 95%CI 50.8%-72.7%).
Without an encounter code specific for elective PCI, an algorithm excluding procedures associated with an emergency room visit had the highest sensitivity to identify elective PCI. This offers a reasonable approach to identify elective PCI from administrative data.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1932-6203</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1932-6203</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0231100</identifier><identifier>PMID: 32255803</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: Public Library of Science</publisher><subject>Adolescent ; Adult ; Aged ; Algorithms ; Angina pectoris ; Angioplasty ; Balloon angioplasty ; Cardiology ; Codes ; Computer and Information Sciences ; Confidence intervals ; Coronary Angiography ; Databases, Factual ; Diagnostic systems ; Elective Surgical Procedures - statistics & numerical data ; Emergency medical care ; Emergency medical services ; Emergency procedures ; Exercise Test - methods ; Female ; Health care delivery ; Heart attacks ; Heart Diseases - diagnostic imaging ; Heart Diseases - epidemiology ; Heart Diseases - pathology ; Heart Diseases - surgery ; Humans ; Male ; Medical equipment ; Medical research ; Medicine and Health Sciences ; Middle Aged ; Patient satisfaction ; Patients ; Percutaneous Coronary Intervention - statistics & numerical data ; Pharmaceutical sciences ; Pharmacy ; Physical Sciences ; Research and Analysis Methods ; Retrospective Studies ; Sensitivity ; Studies</subject><ispartof>PloS one, 2020-04, Vol.15 (4), p.e0231100-e0231100</ispartof><rights>COPYRIGHT 2020 Public Library of Science</rights><rights>2020 Derington et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (the “License”), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.</rights><rights>2020 Derington et al 2020 Derington et al</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c692t-25ba88060166b36a53ca40b7775d0c1a61c341774a2fa597304145f2d86ee0a3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c692t-25ba88060166b36a53ca40b7775d0c1a61c341774a2fa597304145f2d86ee0a3</cites><orcidid>0000-0002-6530-8415 ; 0000-0001-7382-4607</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7138319/pdf/$$EPDF$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7138319/$$EHTML$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,724,777,781,861,882,2096,2915,23847,27905,27906,53772,53774,79349,79350</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32255803$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><contributor>den Uil, Corstiaan</contributor><creatorcontrib>Derington, Catherine G</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Heath, Lauren J</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kao, David P</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Delate, Thomas</creatorcontrib><title>Validation of algorithms to identify elective percutaneous coronary interventions in administrative databases</title><title>PloS one</title><addtitle>PLoS One</addtitle><description>Elective percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI) are difficult to discriminate from non-elective PCI in administrative data due to non-specific encounter codes, limiting the ability to track outcomes, ensure appropriate medical management, and/or perform research on patients who undergo elective PCI. The objective of this study was to assess the abilities of several algorithms to identify elective PCI procedures using administrative data containing diagnostic, utilization, and/or procedural codes.
For this retrospective study, administrative databases in an integrated healthcare delivery system were queried between 1/1/2015 and 6/31/2016 to identify patients who had an encounter for a PCI. Using clinical criteria, each encounter was classified via chart review as a valid PCI, then as elective or non-elective. Cases were tested against nine pre-determined algorithms. Performance statistics (sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value) and associated 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated. Of 521 PCI encounters reviewed, 497 were valid PCI, 93 of which were elective. An algorithm that excluded emergency room visit events had the highest sensitivity (97.9%, 95%CI 92.5%-99.7%) while an algorithm that included events occurring within 90 days of a cardiologist visit and coronary angiogram or stress test had the highest positive predictive value (62.2%, 95%CI 50.8%-72.7%).
Without an encounter code specific for elective PCI, an algorithm excluding procedures associated with an emergency room visit had the highest sensitivity to identify elective PCI. This offers a reasonable approach to identify elective PCI from administrative data.</description><subject>Adolescent</subject><subject>Adult</subject><subject>Aged</subject><subject>Algorithms</subject><subject>Angina pectoris</subject><subject>Angioplasty</subject><subject>Balloon angioplasty</subject><subject>Cardiology</subject><subject>Codes</subject><subject>Computer and Information Sciences</subject><subject>Confidence intervals</subject><subject>Coronary Angiography</subject><subject>Databases, Factual</subject><subject>Diagnostic systems</subject><subject>Elective Surgical Procedures - statistics & numerical data</subject><subject>Emergency medical care</subject><subject>Emergency medical services</subject><subject>Emergency procedures</subject><subject>Exercise Test - methods</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Health care delivery</subject><subject>Heart attacks</subject><subject>Heart Diseases - diagnostic imaging</subject><subject>Heart Diseases - epidemiology</subject><subject>Heart Diseases - pathology</subject><subject>Heart Diseases - surgery</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Medical equipment</subject><subject>Medical research</subject><subject>Medicine and Health Sciences</subject><subject>Middle Aged</subject><subject>Patient satisfaction</subject><subject>Patients</subject><subject>Percutaneous Coronary Intervention - statistics & numerical data</subject><subject>Pharmaceutical sciences</subject><subject>Pharmacy</subject><subject>Physical Sciences</subject><subject>Research and Analysis Methods</subject><subject>Retrospective Studies</subject><subject>Sensitivity</subject><subject>Studies</subject><issn>1932-6203</issn><issn>1932-6203</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2020</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><sourceid>GNUQQ</sourceid><sourceid>DOA</sourceid><recordid>eNqNk11r2zAUhs3YWLts_2BshsHYLpLpw5Kcm0Ip-wgUClvprTiW5ERBtjJJDuu_n_LREo9eDF_Ilp73lc8rnaJ4i9EMU4G_rP0QenCzje_NDBGKMULPinM8p2TKCaLPT97PilcxrhFitOb8ZXFGCWGsRvS86O7AWQ3J-r70bQlu6YNNqy6WyZdWmz7Z9r40zqhkt6bcmKCGBL3xQyyVD76HcF_aPpmw3bG-j_mrBN3Z3sYUYK_K_tBANPF18aIFF82b4zgpbr99vb36Mb2--b64uryeKj4naUpYA3WNOMKcN5QDowoq1AghmEYKA8eKVliICkgLbC4oqnDFWqJrbgwCOineH2w3zkd5DCpKQmtBKsJZnYnFgdAe1nITbJfrkB6s3E_4sJQQklXOSNLUGplGay5MVc8VoIpBK7hphW4rrLPXxXG3oemMVjmHAG5kOl7p7Uou_VYKTGuaz2hSfDoaBP97MDHJzkZlnDvkvP9vznIyIqMf_kGfru5ILSEXYPvW533VzlRecjwXiHFOMzV7gsqPNp1V-Va1Ns-PBJ9Hgswk8yctYYhRLn79_H_25m7MfjxhVwZcWkXvhv11GoPVAVTBxxhM-xgyRnLXFA9pyF1TyGNTZNm70wN6FD10Af0LqRkJNA</recordid><startdate>20200407</startdate><enddate>20200407</enddate><creator>Derington, Catherine G</creator><creator>Heath, Lauren J</creator><creator>Kao, David P</creator><creator>Delate, Thomas</creator><general>Public Library of Science</general><general>Public Library of Science (PLoS)</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>IOV</scope><scope>ISR</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7QG</scope><scope>7QL</scope><scope>7QO</scope><scope>7RV</scope><scope>7SN</scope><scope>7SS</scope><scope>7T5</scope><scope>7TG</scope><scope>7TM</scope><scope>7U9</scope><scope>7X2</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>8AO</scope><scope>8C1</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FG</scope><scope>8FH</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABJCF</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AEUYN</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ARAPS</scope><scope>ATCPS</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BBNVY</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BGLVJ</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>D1I</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>H94</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>KB.</scope><scope>KB0</scope><scope>KL.</scope><scope>L6V</scope><scope>LK8</scope><scope>M0K</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>M7N</scope><scope>M7P</scope><scope>M7S</scope><scope>NAPCQ</scope><scope>P5Z</scope><scope>P62</scope><scope>P64</scope><scope>PATMY</scope><scope>PDBOC</scope><scope>PIMPY</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>PTHSS</scope><scope>PYCSY</scope><scope>RC3</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope><scope>DOA</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6530-8415</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7382-4607</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20200407</creationdate><title>Validation of algorithms to identify elective percutaneous coronary interventions in administrative databases</title><author>Derington, Catherine G ; Heath, Lauren J ; Kao, David P ; Delate, Thomas</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c692t-25ba88060166b36a53ca40b7775d0c1a61c341774a2fa597304145f2d86ee0a3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2020</creationdate><topic>Adolescent</topic><topic>Adult</topic><topic>Aged</topic><topic>Algorithms</topic><topic>Angina pectoris</topic><topic>Angioplasty</topic><topic>Balloon angioplasty</topic><topic>Cardiology</topic><topic>Codes</topic><topic>Computer and Information Sciences</topic><topic>Confidence intervals</topic><topic>Coronary Angiography</topic><topic>Databases, Factual</topic><topic>Diagnostic systems</topic><topic>Elective Surgical Procedures - statistics & numerical data</topic><topic>Emergency medical care</topic><topic>Emergency medical services</topic><topic>Emergency procedures</topic><topic>Exercise Test - methods</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Health care delivery</topic><topic>Heart attacks</topic><topic>Heart Diseases - diagnostic imaging</topic><topic>Heart Diseases - epidemiology</topic><topic>Heart Diseases - pathology</topic><topic>Heart Diseases - surgery</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Medical equipment</topic><topic>Medical research</topic><topic>Medicine and Health Sciences</topic><topic>Middle Aged</topic><topic>Patient satisfaction</topic><topic>Patients</topic><topic>Percutaneous Coronary Intervention - statistics & numerical data</topic><topic>Pharmaceutical sciences</topic><topic>Pharmacy</topic><topic>Physical Sciences</topic><topic>Research and Analysis Methods</topic><topic>Retrospective Studies</topic><topic>Sensitivity</topic><topic>Studies</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Derington, Catherine G</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Heath, Lauren J</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kao, David P</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Delate, Thomas</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Gale In Context: Opposing Viewpoints</collection><collection>Gale In Context: Science</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Animal Behavior Abstracts</collection><collection>Bacteriology Abstracts (Microbiology B)</collection><collection>Biotechnology Research Abstracts</collection><collection>ProQuest Nursing and Allied Health Source</collection><collection>Ecology Abstracts</collection><collection>Entomology Abstracts (Full archive)</collection><collection>Immunology Abstracts</collection><collection>Meteorological & Geoastrophysical Abstracts</collection><collection>Nucleic Acids Abstracts</collection><collection>Virology and AIDS Abstracts</collection><collection>Agricultural Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Health and Medical</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Pharma Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Public Health Database</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Technology Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Materials Science & Engineering Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Sustainability</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Advanced Technologies & Aerospace Database (1962 - current)</collection><collection>Agricultural & Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Technology Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Materials Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>AIDS and Cancer Research Abstracts</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>https://resources.nclive.org/materials</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Meteorological & Geoastrophysical Abstracts - Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest Engineering Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>Agriculture Science Database</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>Algology Mycology and Protozoology Abstracts (Microbiology C)</collection><collection>ProQuest Biological Science Journals</collection><collection>Engineering Database</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Premium</collection><collection>ProQuest advanced technologies & aerospace journals</collection><collection>ProQuest Advanced Technologies & Aerospace Collection</collection><collection>Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts</collection><collection>Environmental Science Database</collection><collection>Materials science collection</collection><collection>Publicly Available Content Database</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>Engineering collection</collection><collection>Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>Genetics Abstracts</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><collection>Directory of Open Access Journals</collection><jtitle>PloS one</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Derington, Catherine G</au><au>Heath, Lauren J</au><au>Kao, David P</au><au>Delate, Thomas</au><au>den Uil, Corstiaan</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Validation of algorithms to identify elective percutaneous coronary interventions in administrative databases</atitle><jtitle>PloS one</jtitle><addtitle>PLoS One</addtitle><date>2020-04-07</date><risdate>2020</risdate><volume>15</volume><issue>4</issue><spage>e0231100</spage><epage>e0231100</epage><pages>e0231100-e0231100</pages><issn>1932-6203</issn><eissn>1932-6203</eissn><abstract>Elective percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI) are difficult to discriminate from non-elective PCI in administrative data due to non-specific encounter codes, limiting the ability to track outcomes, ensure appropriate medical management, and/or perform research on patients who undergo elective PCI. The objective of this study was to assess the abilities of several algorithms to identify elective PCI procedures using administrative data containing diagnostic, utilization, and/or procedural codes.
For this retrospective study, administrative databases in an integrated healthcare delivery system were queried between 1/1/2015 and 6/31/2016 to identify patients who had an encounter for a PCI. Using clinical criteria, each encounter was classified via chart review as a valid PCI, then as elective or non-elective. Cases were tested against nine pre-determined algorithms. Performance statistics (sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value) and associated 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated. Of 521 PCI encounters reviewed, 497 were valid PCI, 93 of which were elective. An algorithm that excluded emergency room visit events had the highest sensitivity (97.9%, 95%CI 92.5%-99.7%) while an algorithm that included events occurring within 90 days of a cardiologist visit and coronary angiogram or stress test had the highest positive predictive value (62.2%, 95%CI 50.8%-72.7%).
Without an encounter code specific for elective PCI, an algorithm excluding procedures associated with an emergency room visit had the highest sensitivity to identify elective PCI. This offers a reasonable approach to identify elective PCI from administrative data.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>Public Library of Science</pub><pmid>32255803</pmid><doi>10.1371/journal.pone.0231100</doi><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6530-8415</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7382-4607</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 1932-6203 |
| ispartof | PloS one, 2020-04, Vol.15 (4), p.e0231100-e0231100 |
| issn | 1932-6203 1932-6203 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_plos_journals_2387242658 |
| source | MEDLINE; Full-Text Journals in Chemistry (Open access); Directory of Open Access Journals; PubMed Central (Open Access); Public Library of Science; EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals |
| subjects | Adolescent Adult Aged Algorithms Angina pectoris Angioplasty Balloon angioplasty Cardiology Codes Computer and Information Sciences Confidence intervals Coronary Angiography Databases, Factual Diagnostic systems Elective Surgical Procedures - statistics & numerical data Emergency medical care Emergency medical services Emergency procedures Exercise Test - methods Female Health care delivery Heart attacks Heart Diseases - diagnostic imaging Heart Diseases - epidemiology Heart Diseases - pathology Heart Diseases - surgery Humans Male Medical equipment Medical research Medicine and Health Sciences Middle Aged Patient satisfaction Patients Percutaneous Coronary Intervention - statistics & numerical data Pharmaceutical sciences Pharmacy Physical Sciences Research and Analysis Methods Retrospective Studies Sensitivity Studies |
| title | Validation of algorithms to identify elective percutaneous coronary interventions in administrative databases |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-17T18%3A24%3A53IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-gale_plos_&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Validation%20of%20algorithms%20to%20identify%20elective%20percutaneous%20coronary%20interventions%20in%20administrative%20databases&rft.jtitle=PloS%20one&rft.au=Derington,%20Catherine%20G&rft.date=2020-04-07&rft.volume=15&rft.issue=4&rft.spage=e0231100&rft.epage=e0231100&rft.pages=e0231100-e0231100&rft.issn=1932-6203&rft.eissn=1932-6203&rft_id=info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0231100&rft_dat=%3Cgale_plos_%3EA619705663%3C/gale_plos_%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2387242658&rft_id=info:pmid/32255803&rft_galeid=A619705663&rft_doaj_id=oai_doaj_org_article_2b8d0ebdd67e489ca045af76ef7df41d&rfr_iscdi=true |