Search Results Heading

MBRLSearchResults

mbrl.module.common.modules.added.book.to.shelf
Title added to your shelf!
View what I already have on My Shelf.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Oops! Something went wrong.
While trying to add the title to your shelf something went wrong :( Kindly try again later!
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Oops! Something went wrong.
Oops! Something went wrong.
While trying to remove the title from your shelf something went wrong :( Kindly try again later!
    Done
    Filters
    Reset
  • Discipline
      Discipline
      Clear All
      Discipline
  • Is Peer Reviewed
      Is Peer Reviewed
      Clear All
      Is Peer Reviewed
  • Item Type
      Item Type
      Clear All
      Item Type
  • Subject
      Subject
      Clear All
      Subject
  • Year
      Year
      Clear All
      From:
      -
      To:
  • More Filters
      More Filters
      Clear All
      More Filters
      Source
    • Language
6,570 result(s) for "Medical Records - classification"
Sort by:
Adaptation and Validation of the Combined Comorbidity Score for ICD-10-CM
BACKGROUND:The combined comorbidity score, which merges the Charlson and Elixhauser comorbidity indices, uses the ninth revision of the International Classification of Diseases, Clinical Modification (ICD-9-CM). In October 2015, the United States adopted the 10th revision (ICD-10-CM). OBJECTIVE:The objective of this study is to examine different coding algorithms for the ICD-10-CM combined comorbidity score and compare their performance to the original ICD-9-CM score. METHODS:Four ICD-10-CM coding algorithms were defined2 using General Equivalence Mappings (GEMs), one based on ICD-10-CA (Canadian modification) codes for Charlson and Elixhauser measures, and one including codes from all 3 algorithms. We used claims data from the Clinfomatics Data Mart to identify 2 cohorts. The ICD-10-CM cohort comprised patients who had a hospitalization between January 1, 2016 and March 1, 2016. The ICD-9-CM cohort comprised patients who had a hospitalization between January 1, 2015 and March 1, 2015. We used logistic regression models to predict 30-day hospital readmission for the original score in the ICD-9-CM cohort and for each ICD-10-CM algorithm in the ICD-10-CM cohort. RESULTS:Distributions of each version of the score were similar. The algorithm based on ICD-10-CA codes [c-statistic, 0.646; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.640–0.653] had the most similar discrimination for readmission to the ICD-9-CM version (c, 0.646; 95% CI, 0.639–0.653), but combining all identified ICD-10-CM codes had the highest c-statistic (c, 0.651; 95% CI, 0.644–0.657). CONCLUSIONS:We propose an ICD-10-CM version of the combined comorbidity score that includes codes identified by ICD-10-CA and GEMs. Compared with the original score, it has similar performance in predicting readmission in a population of United States commercially insured individuals.
Coding Algorithms for Defining Comorbidities in ICD-9-CM and ICD-10 Administrative Data
Objectives: Implementation of the International Statistical Classification of Disease and Related Health Problems, 10th Revision (ICD-10) coding system presents challenges for using administrative data. Recognizing this, we conducted a multistep process to develop ICD-10 coding algorithms to define Charlson and Elixhauser comorbidities in administrative data and assess the performance of the resulting algorithms. Methods: ICD-10 coding algorithms were developed by \"translation\" of the ICD-9-CM codes constituting Deyo's (for Charlson comorbidities) and Elixhauser's coding algorithms and by physicians' assessment of the face-validity of selected ICD-10 codes. The process of carefully developing ICD-10 algorithms also produced modified and enhanced ICD-9-CM coding algorithms for the Charlson and Elixhauser comorbidities. We then used data on in-patients aged 18 years and older in ICD-9-CM and ICD-10 administrative hospital discharge data from a Canadian health region to assess the comorbidity frequencies and mortality prediction achieved by the original ICD-9-CM algorithms, the enhanced ICD-9-CM algorithms, and the new ICD-10 coding algorithms. Results: Among 56,585 patients in the ICD-9-CM data and 58,805 patients in the ICD-10 data, frequencies of the 17 Charlson comorbidities and the 30 Elixhauser comorbidities remained generally similar across algorithms. The new ICD-10 and enhanced ICD-9-CM coding algorithms either matched or outperformed the original Deyo and Elixhauser ICD-9-CM coding algorithms in predicting in-hospital mortality. The C-statistic was 0.842 for Deyo's ICD-9-CM coding algorithm, 0.860 for the ICD-10 coding algorithm, and 0.859 for the enhanced ICD-9-CM coding algorithm, 0.868 for the original Elixhauser ICD-9-CM coding algorithm, 0.870 for the ICD-10 coding algorithm and 0.878 for the enhanced ICD-9-CM coding algorithm. Conclusions: These newly developed ICD-10 and ICD-9-CM comorbidity coding algorithms produce similar estimates of comorbidity prevalence in administrative data, and may outperform existing ICD-9-CM coding algorithms.
The Development, Evolution, and Modifications of ICD-10: Challenges to the International Comparability of Morbidity Data
Background: The United States is about to make a major nationwide transition from ICD-9-CM coding of hospital discharges to ICD-10-CM, a country-specific modification of the World Health Organization's ICD-10. As this transition occurs, the WHO is already in the midst of developing ICD-11. Given this context, we undertook this review to discuss: (1) the history of the International Classification of Diseases (a core information \"building block\" for health systems everywhere) from its introduction to the current era of ICD-11 development; (2) differences across country-specific ICD-10 clinical modifications and the challenges that these differences pose to the international comparability of morbidity data; (3) potential strategic approaches to achieving better international ICD-11 comparability. Literature Review and Discussion: A literature review and stakeholder consultation was carried out. The various ICD-10 clinical modifications (ICD-10-AM [Australia], ICD-10-CA [Canada], ICD-10-GM [Germany], ICD-10-TM [Thailand], ICD-10-CM [United States]) were compared. These ICD-10 modifications differ in their number of codes, chapters, and subcategories. Specific conditions are present in some but not all of the modifications. ICD-11, with a similar structure to ICD-10, will function in an electronic health records environment and also provide disease descriptive characteristics (eg, causal properties, functional impact, and treatment). Conclusion: The threat to the comparability of international clinical morbidity is growing with the development of many country-specific ICD-10 versions. One solution to this threat is to develop a meta-database including all country-specific modifications to ensure more efficient use of people and resources, decrease omissions and errors but most importantly provide a platform for future ICD updates.
Validity of Procedure Codes in International Classification of Diseases, 9th Revision, Clinical Modification Administrative Data
Background: Administrative hospital discharge data are widely used to assess quality of care in patients undergoing certain procedures. However, little is known about the validity of administrative coding of procedure data. We conducted a detailed chart review to evaluate the accuracy and completeness of information on procedures in administrative data. Methods: We randomly selected 1200 hospital separations in the period April 1, 1996, to March 31, 1997, from administrative discharge data of 3 acute adult hospitals in Calgary, Alberta, Canada. Each separation record in administrative data contains up to 10 procedure coding fields. The corresponding medical charts were\" reviewed for recording presence or absence of procedures. We then determined sensitivity to quantify the accuracy of coding presence of procedures in administrative data when these are present in the chart data (criterion standard). Results: The agreement between the 2 databases varied greatly across 35 procedures studied. The sensitivity ranged from 0% to 94%. Of 6 major procedures studied, validity of coding was generally good, with 5 procedures having coding sensitivity of 69% and over and only 1 (lysis of peritoneal adhesion) with a low sensitivity of 41%. In contrast, many minor procedures had low sensitivities. Of 29 minor procedures studied, sensitivity was lower than 50% for 15 procedures, between 50% and 79% for 10, and 80% and over for 4. Conclusion: Validity of information on procedures in administrative discharge data appears to be related to type of procedures. Major procedures that are usually performed in operating rooms are reasonably well-coded. Meanwhile, minor procedures that are routinely performed on wards or in radiology departments are generally undercoded.
Automated encoding of clinical documents based on natural language processing
The aim of this study was to develop a method based on natural language processing (NLP) that automatically maps an entire clinical document to codes with modifiers and to quantitatively evaluate the method. An existing NLP system, MedLEE, was adapted to automatically generate codes. The method involves matching of structured output generated by MedLEE consisting of findings and modifiers to obtain the most specific code. Recall and precision applied to Unified Medical Language System (UMLS) coding were evaluated in two separate studies. Recall was measured using a test set of 150 randomly selected sentences, which were processed using MedLEE. Results were compared with a reference standard determined manually by seven experts. Precision was measured using a second test set of 150 randomly selected sentences from which UMLS codes were automatically generated by the method and then validated by experts. Recall of the system for UMLS coding of all terms was .77 (95% CI .72–.81), and for coding terms that had corresponding UMLS codes recall was .83 (.79–.87). Recall of the system for extracting all terms was .84 (.81–.88). Recall of the experts ranged from .69 to .91 for extracting terms. The precision of the system was .89 (.87–.91), and precision of the experts ranged from .61 to .91. Extraction of relevant clinical information and UMLS coding were accomplished using a method based on NLP. The method appeared to be comparable to or better than six experts. The advantage of the method is that it maps text to codes along with other related information, rendering the coded output suitable for effective retrieval.
Comparison of Cilostazol and Ticlopidine for One-Month Effectiveness and Safety after Elective Coronary Stenting
To compare the oral antiplatelets, phosphodiesterase III inhibitor cilostazol and the thienopyridine ticlopidine, for one-month effectiveness and safety as an adjunctive therapy after coronary stenting. Published studies retrieved through Medline and other databases from 1966-2002. Meta-analyses evaluated effectiveness and adverse side effects for one-month administrations of aspirin plus cilostazol or aspirin plus ticlopidine therapy after coronary stenting. Major adverse cardiac events (MACE), stent-associated thrombosis or adverse side effects after coronary stenting were compared between the two study arms and expressed with the odds ratios (OR) specific for the individual studies and meta-analytic summary for OR. Five clinical studies met the inclusion criteria, and 4 of these studies underwent meta-analysis. With regard to the comparison of the OR summary for MACE and stent-associated thrombosis for the clinical outcome, there were no statistical significant differences between aspirin plus cilostazol and aspirin plus ticlopidine. While, the incidence of adverse side effects tended to be lower, they were not statistically significant in patients with aspirin plus cilostazol. Our meta-analysis results indicated that there were no differences between cilostazol (plus aspirin) and ticlopidine (plus aspirin) with regard to effectiveness and safety for a one-month period when used as an adjunctive therapy after coronary stenting.
Patient Dossier: Healthcare queries over distributed resources
As with many other aspects of the modern world, in healthcare, the explosion of data and resources opens new opportunities for the development of added-value services. Still, a number of specific conditions on this domain greatly hinders these developments, including ethical and legal issues, fragmentation of the relevant data in different locations, and a level of (meta)data complexity that requires great expertise across technical, clinical, and biological domains. We propose the Patient Dossier paradigm as a way to organize new innovative healthcare services that sorts the current limitations. The Patient Dossier conceptual framework identifies the different issues and suggests how they can be tackled in a safe, efficient, and responsible way while opening options for independent development for different players in the healthcare sector. An initial implementation of the Patient Dossier concepts in the Rbbt framework is available as open-source at https://github.com/mikisvaz and https://github.com/Rbbt-Workflows.
Implementation of ICD-10 in Canada: how has it impacted coded hospital discharge data?
Background The purpose of this study was to assess whether or not the change in coding classification had an impact on diagnosis and comorbidity coding in hospital discharge data across Canadian provinces. Methods This study examined eight years (fiscal years 1998 to 2005) of hospital records from the Hospital Person-Oriented Information database (HPOI) derived from the Canadian national Discharge Abstract Database. The average number of coded diagnoses per hospital visit was examined from 1998 to 2005 for provinces that switched from International Classifications of Disease 9 th version (ICD-9-CM) to ICD-10-CA during this period. The average numbers of type 2 and 3 diagnoses were also described. The prevalence of the Charlson comorbidities and distribution of the Charlson score one year before and one year after ICD-10 implementation for each of the 9 provinces was examined. The prevalence of at least one of the seventeen Charlson comorbidities one year before and one year after ICD-10 implementation were described by hospital characteristics (teaching/non-teaching, urban/rural, volume of patients). Results Nine Canadian provinces switched from ICD-9-CM to ICD-I0-CA over a 6 year period starting in 2001. The average number of diagnoses coded per hospital visit for all code types over the study period was 2.58. After implementation of ICD-10-CA a decrease in the number of diagnoses coded was found in four provinces whereas the number of diagnoses coded in the other five provinces remained similar. The prevalence of at least one of the seventeen Charlson conditions remained relatively stable after ICD-10 was implemented, as did the distribution of the Charlson score. When stratified by hospital characteristics, the prevalence of at least one Charlson condition decreased after ICD-10-CA implementation, particularly for low volume hospitals. Conclusion In conclusion, implementation of ICD-10-CA in Canadian provinces did not substantially change coding practices, but there was some coding variation in the average number of diagnoses per hospital visit across provinces.
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 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.
Structured reporting of x-rays for atraumatic shoulder pain: advantages over free text?
Background To analyse structured and free text reports of shoulder X-ray examinations evaluating the quality of reports and potential contributions to clinical decision-making. Methods We acquired both standard free text and structured reports of 31 patients with a painful shoulder without history of previous trauma who received X-ray exams. A template was created for the structured report based on the template ID 0000154 (Shoulder X-ray) from radreport.org using online software with clickable decision trees with concomitant generation of structured semantic reports. All reports were evaluated regarding overall quality and key features: content, information extraction and clinical relevance. Results Two experienced orthopaedic surgeons reviewed and rated structured and free text reports of 31 patients independently. The structured reports achieved significantly higher median ratings in all key features evaluated ( P  < 0.001), including facilitation of information extraction ( P  < 0.001) and better contribution to subsequent clinical decision-making ( P  < 0.001). The overall quality of structured reports was significantly higher than in free text report ( P  < 0.001). Conclusions A comprehensive structured template may be a useful tool to assist in clinical decision-making and is, thus, recommended for the reporting of degenerative changes regarding X-ray examinations of the shoulder.