Identification of In-Hospital Complications from Claims Data: Is It Valid?
Objectives. This study examined the validity of the Complications Screening Program (CSP) by testing whether (1) ICD-9-CM codes used to identify a complication are coded completely and accurately and (2) the CSP algorithm successfully separates conditions present on admission from those occurring in...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Medical care 2000-08, Vol.38 (8), p.785-795 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 795 |
---|---|
container_issue | 8 |
container_start_page | 785 |
container_title | Medical care |
container_volume | 38 |
creator | Lawthers, Ann G. McCarthy, Ellen P. Davis, Roger B. Peterson, Laura E. Palmer, R. Heather Iezzoni, Lisa I. |
description | Objectives. This study examined the validity of the Complications Screening Program (CSP) by testing whether (1) ICD-9-CM codes used to identify a complication are coded completely and accurately and (2) the CSP algorithm successfully separates conditions present on admission from those occurring in the hospital. Methods. We compared diagnosis and procedure codes contained in the Medicare claim with codes abstracted from an independent re-review of more than 1,200 medical records from Connecticut and California. Results. Eighty-nine percent of the surgical cases and 84% of the medical cases had their CSP trigger codes corroborated by re-review of the medical record. For 13% of the surgical cases and 58% of the medical cases, the condition represented by the code was judged to be present on admission rather than occurring in-hospital. The positive predictive value of the claim was greater than 80% for the surgical risk pool, suggesting the value of the CSP as a screening tool. Conclusions. The CSP has validity as a screen for most surgical complications but only for 1 medical complication. The CSP does not have validity as a "stand-alone" tool to identify more than a few in-hospital surgery-related events. The addition of an indicator to the Medicare claim to capture the timing of secondary diagnoses would improve the validity of the CSP for identifying both surgical and medical in-hospital events. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1097/00005650-200008000-00003 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>jstor_proqu</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_71260110</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><jstor_id>3766959</jstor_id><sourcerecordid>3766959</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3223-7496ec51eb11c0d173c477d60be63f8caee3610eb9b8ca45819c0aa23ae395d53</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1UU1PxCAQJUaj68c_MIaTtyqUUooXY9avGhMv6pVQOs12pcsKbIz_XtauxoskE2aG995MHghhSs4okeKcpMNLTrJ8nVUpsnXCttCEciYyKotqG00IyXkmiJB7aD-EOSFUMJ7vor0kkksp6QQ91C0sYt_1RsfeLbDrcL3I7l1Y9lFbPHXD0m7eAu68G_DU6n4I-FpHfYHrgOuIX7Xt28tDtNNpG-Bocx-gl9ub5-l99vh0V0-vHjPD8pxlopAlGE6hodSQNq1kCiHakjRQsq4yGoCVlEAjm1QUvKLSEK1zpoFJ3nJ2gE5H3aV37ysIUQ19MGCtXoBbBSVoXhJKSQJWI9B4F4KHTi19P2j_qShRax_Vj4_q18fvFkvUk82MVTNA-4c4GpcAxQj4cDaCD2929QFezUDbOFP__U-iHY-0eYjO_8oyUZaSS_YFTcKFLQ</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>71260110</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Identification of In-Hospital Complications from Claims Data: Is It Valid?</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Journals@Ovid Complete</source><source>JSTOR Archive Collection A-Z Listing</source><creator>Lawthers, Ann G. ; McCarthy, Ellen P. ; Davis, Roger B. ; Peterson, Laura E. ; Palmer, R. Heather ; Iezzoni, Lisa I.</creator><creatorcontrib>Lawthers, Ann G. ; McCarthy, Ellen P. ; Davis, Roger B. ; Peterson, Laura E. ; Palmer, R. Heather ; Iezzoni, Lisa I.</creatorcontrib><description>Objectives. This study examined the validity of the Complications Screening Program (CSP) by testing whether (1) ICD-9-CM codes used to identify a complication are coded completely and accurately and (2) the CSP algorithm successfully separates conditions present on admission from those occurring in the hospital. Methods. We compared diagnosis and procedure codes contained in the Medicare claim with codes abstracted from an independent re-review of more than 1,200 medical records from Connecticut and California. Results. Eighty-nine percent of the surgical cases and 84% of the medical cases had their CSP trigger codes corroborated by re-review of the medical record. For 13% of the surgical cases and 58% of the medical cases, the condition represented by the code was judged to be present on admission rather than occurring in-hospital. The positive predictive value of the claim was greater than 80% for the surgical risk pool, suggesting the value of the CSP as a screening tool. Conclusions. The CSP has validity as a screen for most surgical complications but only for 1 medical complication. The CSP does not have validity as a "stand-alone" tool to identify more than a few in-hospital surgery-related events. The addition of an indicator to the Medicare claim to capture the timing of secondary diagnoses would improve the validity of the CSP for identifying both surgical and medical in-hospital events.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0025-7079</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1537-1948</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1097/00005650-200008000-00003</identifier><identifier>PMID: 10929991</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: J. B. Lippincott Williams and Wilkins Inc</publisher><subject>Aged ; California - epidemiology ; Clinical coding ; Connecticut - epidemiology ; Female ; Health care quality ; Hemorrhage ; Hospital admissions ; Hospitals - standards ; Humans ; Iatrogenic Disease ; Insurance Claim Review - classification ; Insurance pools ; Male ; Medical Audit - methods ; Medical records ; Medical Records - classification ; Medicare ; Medicare - standards ; Patient Discharge ; Postoperative complications ; Postoperative Complications - classification ; Postoperative Complications - epidemiology ; Professional Review Organizations ; Quality Indicators, Health Care - classification ; Reproducibility of Results ; Risk Factors ; Surgical procedures ; Surgical specialties ; United States</subject><ispartof>Medical care, 2000-08, Vol.38 (8), p.785-795</ispartof><rights>Copyright 2000 Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, Inc.</rights><rights>2000 Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, Inc.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3223-7496ec51eb11c0d173c477d60be63f8caee3610eb9b8ca45819c0aa23ae395d53</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/3766959$$EPDF$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/3766959$$EHTML$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,803,27924,27925,58017,58250</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10929991$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Lawthers, Ann G.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>McCarthy, Ellen P.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Davis, Roger B.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Peterson, Laura E.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Palmer, R. Heather</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Iezzoni, Lisa I.</creatorcontrib><title>Identification of In-Hospital Complications from Claims Data: Is It Valid?</title><title>Medical care</title><addtitle>Med Care</addtitle><description>Objectives. This study examined the validity of the Complications Screening Program (CSP) by testing whether (1) ICD-9-CM codes used to identify a complication are coded completely and accurately and (2) the CSP algorithm successfully separates conditions present on admission from those occurring in the hospital. Methods. We compared diagnosis and procedure codes contained in the Medicare claim with codes abstracted from an independent re-review of more than 1,200 medical records from Connecticut and California. Results. Eighty-nine percent of the surgical cases and 84% of the medical cases had their CSP trigger codes corroborated by re-review of the medical record. For 13% of the surgical cases and 58% of the medical cases, the condition represented by the code was judged to be present on admission rather than occurring in-hospital. The positive predictive value of the claim was greater than 80% for the surgical risk pool, suggesting the value of the CSP as a screening tool. Conclusions. The CSP has validity as a screen for most surgical complications but only for 1 medical complication. The CSP does not have validity as a "stand-alone" tool to identify more than a few in-hospital surgery-related events. The addition of an indicator to the Medicare claim to capture the timing of secondary diagnoses would improve the validity of the CSP for identifying both surgical and medical in-hospital events.</description><subject>Aged</subject><subject>California - epidemiology</subject><subject>Clinical coding</subject><subject>Connecticut - epidemiology</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Health care quality</subject><subject>Hemorrhage</subject><subject>Hospital admissions</subject><subject>Hospitals - standards</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Iatrogenic Disease</subject><subject>Insurance Claim Review - classification</subject><subject>Insurance pools</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Medical Audit - methods</subject><subject>Medical records</subject><subject>Medical Records - classification</subject><subject>Medicare</subject><subject>Medicare - standards</subject><subject>Patient Discharge</subject><subject>Postoperative complications</subject><subject>Postoperative Complications - classification</subject><subject>Postoperative Complications - epidemiology</subject><subject>Professional Review Organizations</subject><subject>Quality Indicators, Health Care - classification</subject><subject>Reproducibility of Results</subject><subject>Risk Factors</subject><subject>Surgical procedures</subject><subject>Surgical specialties</subject><subject>United States</subject><issn>0025-7079</issn><issn>1537-1948</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2000</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNp1UU1PxCAQJUaj68c_MIaTtyqUUooXY9avGhMv6pVQOs12pcsKbIz_XtauxoskE2aG995MHghhSs4okeKcpMNLTrJ8nVUpsnXCttCEciYyKotqG00IyXkmiJB7aD-EOSFUMJ7vor0kkksp6QQ91C0sYt_1RsfeLbDrcL3I7l1Y9lFbPHXD0m7eAu68G_DU6n4I-FpHfYHrgOuIX7Xt28tDtNNpG-Bocx-gl9ub5-l99vh0V0-vHjPD8pxlopAlGE6hodSQNq1kCiHakjRQsq4yGoCVlEAjm1QUvKLSEK1zpoFJ3nJ2gE5H3aV37ysIUQ19MGCtXoBbBSVoXhJKSQJWI9B4F4KHTi19P2j_qShRax_Vj4_q18fvFkvUk82MVTNA-4c4GpcAxQj4cDaCD2929QFezUDbOFP__U-iHY-0eYjO_8oyUZaSS_YFTcKFLQ</recordid><startdate>200008</startdate><enddate>200008</enddate><creator>Lawthers, Ann G.</creator><creator>McCarthy, Ellen P.</creator><creator>Davis, Roger B.</creator><creator>Peterson, Laura E.</creator><creator>Palmer, R. Heather</creator><creator>Iezzoni, Lisa I.</creator><general>J. B. Lippincott Williams and Wilkins Inc</general><general>Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, Inc</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>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>200008</creationdate><title>Identification of In-Hospital Complications from Claims Data: Is It Valid?</title><author>Lawthers, Ann G. ; McCarthy, Ellen P. ; Davis, Roger B. ; Peterson, Laura E. ; Palmer, R. Heather ; Iezzoni, Lisa I.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c3223-7496ec51eb11c0d173c477d60be63f8caee3610eb9b8ca45819c0aa23ae395d53</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2000</creationdate><topic>Aged</topic><topic>California - epidemiology</topic><topic>Clinical coding</topic><topic>Connecticut - epidemiology</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Health care quality</topic><topic>Hemorrhage</topic><topic>Hospital admissions</topic><topic>Hospitals - standards</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Iatrogenic Disease</topic><topic>Insurance Claim Review - classification</topic><topic>Insurance pools</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Medical Audit - methods</topic><topic>Medical records</topic><topic>Medical Records - classification</topic><topic>Medicare</topic><topic>Medicare - standards</topic><topic>Patient Discharge</topic><topic>Postoperative complications</topic><topic>Postoperative Complications - classification</topic><topic>Postoperative Complications - epidemiology</topic><topic>Professional Review Organizations</topic><topic>Quality Indicators, Health Care - classification</topic><topic>Reproducibility of Results</topic><topic>Risk Factors</topic><topic>Surgical procedures</topic><topic>Surgical specialties</topic><topic>United States</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Lawthers, Ann G.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>McCarthy, Ellen P.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Davis, Roger B.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Peterson, Laura E.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Palmer, R. Heather</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Iezzoni, Lisa I.</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Medical care</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Lawthers, Ann G.</au><au>McCarthy, Ellen P.</au><au>Davis, Roger B.</au><au>Peterson, Laura E.</au><au>Palmer, R. Heather</au><au>Iezzoni, Lisa I.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Identification of In-Hospital Complications from Claims Data: Is It Valid?</atitle><jtitle>Medical care</jtitle><addtitle>Med Care</addtitle><date>2000-08</date><risdate>2000</risdate><volume>38</volume><issue>8</issue><spage>785</spage><epage>795</epage><pages>785-795</pages><issn>0025-7079</issn><eissn>1537-1948</eissn><abstract>Objectives. This study examined the validity of the Complications Screening Program (CSP) by testing whether (1) ICD-9-CM codes used to identify a complication are coded completely and accurately and (2) the CSP algorithm successfully separates conditions present on admission from those occurring in the hospital. Methods. We compared diagnosis and procedure codes contained in the Medicare claim with codes abstracted from an independent re-review of more than 1,200 medical records from Connecticut and California. Results. Eighty-nine percent of the surgical cases and 84% of the medical cases had their CSP trigger codes corroborated by re-review of the medical record. For 13% of the surgical cases and 58% of the medical cases, the condition represented by the code was judged to be present on admission rather than occurring in-hospital. The positive predictive value of the claim was greater than 80% for the surgical risk pool, suggesting the value of the CSP as a screening tool. Conclusions. The CSP has validity as a screen for most surgical complications but only for 1 medical complication. The CSP does not have validity as a "stand-alone" tool to identify more than a few in-hospital surgery-related events. The addition of an indicator to the Medicare claim to capture the timing of secondary diagnoses would improve the validity of the CSP for identifying both surgical and medical in-hospital events.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>J. B. Lippincott Williams and Wilkins Inc</pub><pmid>10929991</pmid><doi>10.1097/00005650-200008000-00003</doi><tpages>11</tpages></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0025-7079 |
ispartof | Medical care, 2000-08, Vol.38 (8), p.785-795 |
issn | 0025-7079 1537-1948 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_71260110 |
source | MEDLINE; Journals@Ovid Complete; JSTOR Archive Collection A-Z Listing |
subjects | Aged California - epidemiology Clinical coding Connecticut - epidemiology Female Health care quality Hemorrhage Hospital admissions Hospitals - standards Humans Iatrogenic Disease Insurance Claim Review - classification Insurance pools Male Medical Audit - methods Medical records Medical Records - classification Medicare Medicare - standards Patient Discharge Postoperative complications Postoperative Complications - classification Postoperative Complications - epidemiology Professional Review Organizations Quality Indicators, Health Care - classification Reproducibility of Results Risk Factors Surgical procedures Surgical specialties United States |
title | Identification of In-Hospital Complications from Claims Data: Is It Valid? |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-04T10%3A00%3A03IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-jstor_proqu&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Identification%20of%20In-Hospital%20Complications%20from%20Claims%20Data:%20Is%20It%20Valid?&rft.jtitle=Medical%20care&rft.au=Lawthers,%20Ann%20G.&rft.date=2000-08&rft.volume=38&rft.issue=8&rft.spage=785&rft.epage=795&rft.pages=785-795&rft.issn=0025-7079&rft.eissn=1537-1948&rft_id=info:doi/10.1097/00005650-200008000-00003&rft_dat=%3Cjstor_proqu%3E3766959%3C/jstor_proqu%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=71260110&rft_id=info:pmid/10929991&rft_jstor_id=3766959&rfr_iscdi=true |