Muscle & nerve · 2022
Validation of myasthenia gravis diagnosis in the older Medicare population.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
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.
Lee Ikjae, Schold Jesse D, Hehir Michael K, Claytor Benjamin, Silvestri Nicholas, Li Yuebing
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION/AIMS: Administrative health data has been increasingly used to study the epidemiology of myasthenia gravis (MG) but a case ascertainment algorithm is lacking. We aimed to develop a valid algorithm for identifying MG patients in the older population with Medicare coverage.
METHODS: Local older patients (age ≥65) who received healthcare at the Cleveland Clinic and possessed Medicare coverage in 2014 and 2015 were selected. Potential MG patients were identified by using a combination of ICD9 or ICD10 codes for MG and MG-related text-word search. Diagnosis was categorized as "definite MG", "possible MG" or "non-MG" after review of clinical summaries by 5 neuromuscular specialists. Performances of various algorithms were tested by use of the definite MG cohort as a reference standard, and calculation of sensitivity, specificity, and predictive values.
RESULTS: A total of 118 988 local older patients with Medicare coverage were identified. Usage of MG ICD codes and text-word search resulted in 125 patients with definite and 67 with possible MG. A total of 45 algorithms involving ICD usage, medication prescription, and specialty visit were tested. The best performing algorithm was identified as 2 office visits using MG ICD codes separated by at least 4 weeks or 1 hospital discharge and 1 office visit each using MG ICD codes separated by at least 4 weeks within the two-year period, resulting in a sensitivity and positive predictive value of 80% for identifying definite MG patients.
DISCUSSION: Algorithms using ICD codes can reliably identify patients with MG with a high degree of accuracy.
METHODS: Local older patients (age ≥65) who received healthcare at the Cleveland Clinic and possessed Medicare coverage in 2014 and 2015 were selected. Potential MG patients were identified by using a combination of ICD9 or ICD10 codes for MG and MG-related text-word search. Diagnosis was categorized as "definite MG", "possible MG" or "non-MG" after review of clinical summaries by 5 neuromuscular specialists. Performances of various algorithms were tested by use of the definite MG cohort as a reference standard, and calculation of sensitivity, specificity, and predictive values.
RESULTS: A total of 118 988 local older patients with Medicare coverage were identified. Usage of MG ICD codes and text-word search resulted in 125 patients with definite and 67 with possible MG. A total of 45 algorithms involving ICD usage, medication prescription, and specialty visit were tested. The best performing algorithm was identified as 2 office visits using MG ICD codes separated by at least 4 weeks or 1 hospital discharge and 1 office visit each using MG ICD codes separated by at least 4 weeks within the two-year period, resulting in a sensitivity and positive predictive value of 80% for identifying definite MG patients.
DISCUSSION: Algorithms using ICD codes can reliably identify patients with MG with a high degree of accuracy.