Public health reports (Washington, D.C. : 1974) · 2020
ICD-10-CM-Based Definitions for Emergency Department Opioid Poisoning Surveillance: Electronic Health Record Case Confirmation Study.
СтатьяПоддержка службы здравоохранения СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Slavova Svetla, Quesinberry Dana, Costich Julia F, Pasalic Emilia, Martinez Pedro, Martin Julia, Eustice Sarah, Akpunonu Peter, Bunn Terry L
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES: Valid opioid poisoning morbidity definitions are essential to the accuracy of national surveillance. The goal of our study was to estimate the positive predictive value (PPV) of case definitions identifying emergency department (ED) visits for heroin or other opioid poisonings, using billing records with International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision, Clinical Modification (ICD-10-CM) codes.
METHODS: We examined billing records for ED visits from 4 health care networks (12 EDs) from October 2015 through December 2016. We conducted medical record reviews of representative samples to estimate the PPVs and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) of (1) first-listed heroin poisoning diagnoses (n = 398), (2) secondary heroin poisoning diagnoses (n = 102), (3) first-listed other opioid poisoning diagnoses (n = 452), and (4) secondary other opioid poisoning diagnoses (n = 103).
RESULTS: First-listed heroin poisoning diagnoses had an estimated PPV of 93.2% (95% CI, 90.0%-96.3%), higher than secondary heroin poisoning diagnoses (76.5%; 95% CI, 68.1%-84.8%). Among other opioid poisoning diagnoses, the estimated PPV was 79.4% (95% CI, 75.7%-83.1%) for first-listed diagnoses and 67.0% (95% CI, 57.8%-76.2%) for secondary diagnoses. Naloxone was administered in 867 of 1055 (82.2%) cases; 254 patients received multiple doses. One-third of all patients had a previous drug poisoning. Drug testing was ordered in only 354 cases.
CONCLUSIONS: The study findings suggest that heroin or other opioid poisoning surveillance definitions that include multiple diagnoses (first-listed and secondary) would identify a high percentage of true-positive cases.
METHODS: We examined billing records for ED visits from 4 health care networks (12 EDs) from October 2015 through December 2016. We conducted medical record reviews of representative samples to estimate the PPVs and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) of (1) first-listed heroin poisoning diagnoses (n = 398), (2) secondary heroin poisoning diagnoses (n = 102), (3) first-listed other opioid poisoning diagnoses (n = 452), and (4) secondary other opioid poisoning diagnoses (n = 103).
RESULTS: First-listed heroin poisoning diagnoses had an estimated PPV of 93.2% (95% CI, 90.0%-96.3%), higher than secondary heroin poisoning diagnoses (76.5%; 95% CI, 68.1%-84.8%). Among other opioid poisoning diagnoses, the estimated PPV was 79.4% (95% CI, 75.7%-83.1%) for first-listed diagnoses and 67.0% (95% CI, 57.8%-76.2%) for secondary diagnoses. Naloxone was administered in 867 of 1055 (82.2%) cases; 254 patients received multiple doses. One-third of all patients had a previous drug poisoning. Drug testing was ordered in only 354 cases.
CONCLUSIONS: The study findings suggest that heroin or other opioid poisoning surveillance definitions that include multiple diagnoses (first-listed and secondary) would identify a high percentage of true-positive cases.