3.8 Article

Administrative data has poor accuracy for surveillance of Staphylococcus aureus bacteraemia

期刊

INFECTION DISEASE & HEALTH
卷 21, 期 4, 页码 162-168

出版社

ELSEVIER INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.idh.2016.10.001

关键词

Clinical coding; Staphylococcus aureus; Bacteremia

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: To determine the accuracy of the International Classification of Diseases (ICD-10) coding for Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia (SAB) compared with laboratory results during a ten-year period (January 2002-December 2011). Methods: A retrospective comparison of ICD-10 code A41.0 for S. aureus sepsis with SAB identified from the laboratory information system (LIS). Patients with LIS identified SAB (LIS+) and/or the ICD-10 A41.0 code (ICD-10) were identified and classified as concordant (LIS+/ICD+) or discordant (LIS+/ICD- or LIS-/ICD+). From July 2010 an additional code for healthcare associated SAB (HA-SAB), U90.0, was introduced and evaluated against prospectively designated episodes of HA-SAB. Results and Conclusions: There were 740 laboratory confirmed episodes of SAB however, only 408 of these were recorded by ICD-10 A41.0whilst 106 patients with negative blood cultures were miscoded as ICD-10 A41.0. The sensitivity and PPV for ICD-10 A41.0 were 55% [95% CI: 51-59%] and 72% [95% CI: 68-76%]. For the subset of HA-SAB, the sensitivity and PPV for ICD-10 U90.0 were only 12% [95% CI: 5-24%] and 32% [95% CI: 15-54%] respectively. Surveillance based solely on ICD-10 A41.0, code underestimates the true incidence of SAB even while including non-bacteremic episodes. ICD-10 U90.0 for HA-SAB has even poorer sensitivity and PPV. Laboratory culture results should become the major criterion for ICD-10 coding for SAB to improve the accuracy of surveillance data. (C) 2016 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. on behalf of Australasian College for Infection Prevention and Control.

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

3.8
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