Literature DB >> 12908653

Disparity in coding concordance: do physicians and coders agree?

Daniel P Lorence1, Ibrahim Awad Ibrahim.   

Abstract

Increasing demands for large-scale comparative analysis of health care costs has led to a similar demand for consistently classified data. Evidence-based medicine demands evidence that can be trusted. This study sought to assess managers' observed levels of agreement with physician code selections when classifying patient data. Using a non-sampled research design of both mailed and telephone surveys, we employ a nationwide cross-section of over 16,000 accredited US medical record managers. As a main outcome measure, we evaluate reported levels of agreement between physician and information manager code selections made when classifying patient data. Results indicate about 19 percent of respondents report that coder-physician classification disagreement occurred on more than 5 percent of all patient encounters. In some cases, disagreement occurred in 20 percent or more instances of code selection. This phenomenon shows significant variation across key demographic and market indicators. With the growing practice of measuring coded data quality as an outcome of health care financial performance, along with adoption of electronic classification and patient record systems, the accuracy of coded data is likely to remain uncertain in the absence of more consistent classification and coding practices.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2003        PMID: 12908653

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Health Care Finance        ISSN: 1078-6767


  6 in total

1.  Coding for quality measurement: the relationship between hospital structural characteristics and coding accuracy from the perspective of quality measurement.

Authors:  Pavani Rangachari
Journal:  Perspect Health Inf Manag       Date:  2007-04-16

2.  Applying MetaMap to Medline for identifying novel associations in a large clinical dataset: a feasibility analysis.

Authors:  David A Hanauer; Mohammed Saeed; Kai Zheng; Qiaozhu Mei; Kerby Shedden; Alan R Aronson; Naren Ramakrishnan
Journal:  J Am Med Inform Assoc       Date:  2014-06-13       Impact factor: 4.497

3.  Validity of code based algorithms to identify primary open angle glaucoma (POAG) in Veterans Affairs (VA) administrative databases.

Authors:  K S Biggerstaff; B J Frankfort; S Orengo-Nania; J Garcia; E Chiao; J R Kramer; D White
Journal:  Ophthalmic Epidemiol       Date:  2017-09-25       Impact factor: 1.648

4.  The accuracy of present-on-admission reporting in administrative data.

Authors:  L Elizabeth Goldman; Philip W Chu; Dennis Osmond; Andrew Bindman
Journal:  Health Serv Res       Date:  2011-08-11       Impact factor: 3.402

5.  Phenotype risk scores (PheRS) for pancreatic cancer using time-stamped electronic health record data: Discovery and validation in two large biobanks.

Authors:  Maxwell Salvatore; Lauren J Beesley; Lars G Fritsche; David Hanauer; Xu Shi; Alison M Mondul; Celeste Leigh Pearce; Bhramar Mukherjee
Journal:  J Biomed Inform       Date:  2020-12-03       Impact factor: 8.000

6.  A cohort study on physician documentation and the accuracy of administrative data coding to improve passive surveillance of transient ischaemic attacks.

Authors:  Amy Y X Yu; Hude Quan; Andrew D McRae; Gabrielle O Wagner; Michael D Hill; Shelagh B Coutts
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2017-07-02       Impact factor: 2.692

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.