Preventive medicine reports · 2026
Defining nonfatal opioid overdoses using administrative health data in the United States and Canada: A scoping review.
СтатьяОбзорНазвание 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.
Marziali Megan E, Hansen Silke, Xu Kevin Y, Rowan Esther, Doering Michelle, Annunziato Erin M, Hogg Robert S, Martins Silvia S
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To explore definitions of nonfatal opioid overdoses with study populations based in the United States and Canada, to improve nonfatal overdose monitoring.
METHODS: We searched five databases: PubMed, Medline, Web of Science, Embase, and PsycInfo, including studies published between January 2013-October 2024. We combined overdose-related terms (e.g., overdose, poisoning) and hospital-related terms (e.g., diagnosis code, International Classification of Diseases [ICD], electronic health records) and extracted data from 214 studies that defined opioid overdoses.
RESULTS: Most studies reported on opioid overdoses due to any opioid (n = 175). Studies varied in terms of specific ICD codes. Among studies using ICD, Tenth Revision, Clinical Modification (ICD-10-CM) codes (n = 79), key sources of variation included intent specifications and encounter type; nearly one-third did not specify whether codes reflected an initial encounter, a subsequent visit, or sequelae (n = 24, 30.8%). Of studies that specified, most used all three encounter types (n = 27, 34.6%) or initial only (n = 21, 26.9%). Few specified both initial and sequelae (n = 4, 5.1%) or initial and subsequent encounters (n = 2, 2.6%). Similar patterns were observed across all opioid subtype definitions.
CONCLUSIONS: We observed substantial variation in definitions. Detailed, standardized reporting methods when applying diagnostic codes may improve consistency and transparency and could improve public health monitoring.
METHODS: We searched five databases: PubMed, Medline, Web of Science, Embase, and PsycInfo, including studies published between January 2013-October 2024. We combined overdose-related terms (e.g., overdose, poisoning) and hospital-related terms (e.g., diagnosis code, International Classification of Diseases [ICD], electronic health records) and extracted data from 214 studies that defined opioid overdoses.
RESULTS: Most studies reported on opioid overdoses due to any opioid (n = 175). Studies varied in terms of specific ICD codes. Among studies using ICD, Tenth Revision, Clinical Modification (ICD-10-CM) codes (n = 79), key sources of variation included intent specifications and encounter type; nearly one-third did not specify whether codes reflected an initial encounter, a subsequent visit, or sequelae (n = 24, 30.8%). Of studies that specified, most used all three encounter types (n = 27, 34.6%) or initial only (n = 21, 26.9%). Few specified both initial and sequelae (n = 4, 5.1%) or initial and subsequent encounters (n = 2, 2.6%). Similar patterns were observed across all opioid subtype definitions.
CONCLUSIONS: We observed substantial variation in definitions. Detailed, standardized reporting methods when applying diagnostic codes may improve consistency and transparency and could improve public health monitoring.