4.5 Article

Validation of ICD-10-CM Diagnostic Codes for Identifying Patients with ST-Elevation and Non-ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction in a National Health Insurance Claims Database

期刊

CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY
卷 15, 期 -, 页码 1027-1039

出版社

DOVE MEDICAL PRESS LTD
DOI: 10.2147/CLEP.S431231

关键词

administrative claims data; acute myocardial infarction; diagnosis; ICD-10-CM; non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction; ST-elevation myocardial infarction

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study developed and validated algorithms for distinguishing STEMI and NSTEMI cases in Taiwan's NHI database, providing valuable reference for accurate identification.
Purpose: Distinguishing ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) and non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) is crucial in acute myocardial infarction (AMI) research due to their distinct characteristics. However, the accuracy of International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision, Clinical Modification (ICD-10-CM) codes for STEMI and NSTEMI in Taiwan's National Health Insurance (NHI) database remains unvalidated. Therefore, we developed and validated case definition algorithms for STEMI and NSTEMI using ICD-10-CM and NHI billing codes. Patients and Methods: We obtained claims data and medical records of inpatient visits from 2016 to 2021 from the hospital's research-based database. Potential STEMI and NSTEMI cases were identified using diagnostic codes, keywords, and procedure codes associated with AMI. Chart reviews were then conducted to confirm the cases. The performance of the developed algorithms for STEMI and NSTEMI was assessed and subsequently externally validated. Results: The algorithm that defined STEMI as any STEMI ICD code in the first three diagnosis fields had the highest performance, with a sensitivity of 93.6% (95% confidence interval [CI], 91.7-95.2%), a positive predictive value (PPV) of 89.4% (95% CI, 87.1- 91.4%), and a kappa of 0.914 (95% CI, 0.900-0.928). The algorithm that used the NSTEMI ICD code listed in any diagnosis field performed best in identifying NSTEMI, with a sensitivity of 82.6% (95% CI, 80.7-84.4%), a PPV of 96.5% (95% CI, 95.4-97.4), and a kappa of 0.889 (95% CI, 0.878-0.901). The algorithm that included either STEMI or NSTEMI ICD codes listed in any diagnosis field showed excellent performance in defining AMI, with a sensitivity of 89.4% (95% CI, 88.2-90.6%), a PPV of 95.6% (95% CI, 94.7-96.4%), and a kappa of 0.923 (95% CI, 0.915-0.931). External validation confirmed these algorithms' efficacy. Conclusion: Our results provide valuable reference algorithms for identifying STEMI and NSTEMI cases in Taiwan's NHI database.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据