Hiraku Kumamaru1, Suzanne E Judd1, Jeffrey R Curtis1, Rekha Ramachandran1, N Chantelle Hardy1, J David Rhodes1, Monika M Safford1, Brett M Kissela1, George Howard1, Jessica J Jalbert1, Thomas G Brott1, Soko Setoguchi2. 1. From the Department of Epidemiology, Harvard School of Public Health, Boston, MA (H.K.); Division of Pharmacoepidemiology and Pharmacoeconomics, Brigham and Women's Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA (H.K., J.J.J.); Department of Biostatistics (S.E.J., J.D.R., G.H.) and Department of Epidemiology (J.R.C.), University of Alabama at Birmingham School of Public Health; Department of Medicine, University of Alabama at Birmingham School of Medicine (J.R.C., R.R., M.M.S.); Duke Clinical Research Institute, Department of Medicine, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, NC (N.C.H., S.S.); Department of Neurology, University of Cincinnati, OH (B.M.K.); and Department of Neurology, Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, FL (T.G.B.). 2. From the Department of Epidemiology, Harvard School of Public Health, Boston, MA (H.K.); Division of Pharmacoepidemiology and Pharmacoeconomics, Brigham and Women's Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA (H.K., J.J.J.); Department of Biostatistics (S.E.J., J.D.R., G.H.) and Department of Epidemiology (J.R.C.), University of Alabama at Birmingham School of Public Health; Department of Medicine, University of Alabama at Birmingham School of Medicine (J.R.C., R.R., M.M.S.); Duke Clinical Research Institute, Department of Medicine, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, NC (N.C.H., S.S.); Department of Neurology, University of Cincinnati, OH (B.M.K.); and Department of Neurology, Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, FL (T.G.B.). soko.setoguchi@duke.edu.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The accuracy of stroke diagnosis in administrative claims for a contemporary population of Medicare enrollees has not been studied. We assessed the validity of diagnostic coding algorithms for identifying stroke in the Medicare population by linking data from the REasons for Geographic And Racial Differences in Stroke (REGARDS) Study to Medicare claims. METHODS AND RESULTS: The REGARDS Study enrolled 30 239 participants ≥45 years in the United States between 2003 and 2007. Stroke experts adjudicated suspected strokes, using retrieved medical records. We linked data for participants enrolled in fee-for-service Medicare to claims files from 2003 through 2009. Using adjudicated strokes as the gold standard, we calculated accuracy measures for algorithms to identify incident and recurrent strokes. We linked data for 15 089 participants, among whom 422 participants had adjudicated strokes during follow-up. An algorithm using primary discharge diagnosis codes for acute ischemic or hemorrhagic stroke (International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification codes: 430, 431, 433.x1, 434.x1, 436) had a positive predictive value of 92.6% (95% confidence interval, 88.8%-96.4%), a specificity of 99.8% (99.6%-99.9%), and a sensitivity of 59.5% (53.8%-65.1%). An algorithm using only acute ischemic stroke codes (433.x1, 434.x1, 436) had a positive predictive value of 91.1% (95% confidence interval, 86.6%-95.5%), a specificity of 99.8% (99.7%-99.9%), and a sensitivity of 58.6% (52.4%-64.7%). CONCLUSIONS: Claims-based algorithms to identify stroke in a contemporary Medicare cohort had high positive predictive value and specificity, supporting their use as outcomes for etiologic and comparative effectiveness studies in similar populations. These inpatient algorithms are unsuitable for estimating stroke incidence because of low sensitivity.
BACKGROUND: The accuracy of stroke diagnosis in administrative claims for a contemporary population of Medicare enrollees has not been studied. We assessed the validity of diagnostic coding algorithms for identifying stroke in the Medicare population by linking data from the REasons for Geographic And Racial Differences in Stroke (REGARDS) Study to Medicare claims. METHODS AND RESULTS: The REGARDS Study enrolled 30 239 participants ≥45 years in the United States between 2003 and 2007. Stroke experts adjudicated suspected strokes, using retrieved medical records. We linked data for participants enrolled in fee-for-service Medicare to claims files from 2003 through 2009. Using adjudicated strokes as the gold standard, we calculated accuracy measures for algorithms to identify incident and recurrent strokes. We linked data for 15 089 participants, among whom 422 participants had adjudicated strokes during follow-up. An algorithm using primary discharge diagnosis codes for acute ischemic or hemorrhagic stroke (International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification codes: 430, 431, 433.x1, 434.x1, 436) had a positive predictive value of 92.6% (95% confidence interval, 88.8%-96.4%), a specificity of 99.8% (99.6%-99.9%), and a sensitivity of 59.5% (53.8%-65.1%). An algorithm using only acute ischemic stroke codes (433.x1, 434.x1, 436) had a positive predictive value of 91.1% (95% confidence interval, 86.6%-95.5%), a specificity of 99.8% (99.7%-99.9%), and a sensitivity of 58.6% (52.4%-64.7%). CONCLUSIONS: Claims-based algorithms to identify stroke in a contemporary Medicare cohort had high positive predictive value and specificity, supporting their use as outcomes for etiologic and comparative effectiveness studies in similar populations. These inpatient algorithms are unsuitable for estimating stroke incidence because of low sensitivity.
Authors: Gregory W Albers; Louis R Caplan; J Donald Easton; Pierre B Fayad; J P Mohr; Jeffrey L Saver; David G Sherman Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2002-11-21 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Peter M Wahl; Keith Rodgers; Sebastian Schneeweiss; Brian F Gage; Javed Butler; Charles Wilmer; Marshall Nash; Gregory Esper; Norman Gitlin; Neal Osborn; Louise J Short; Rhonda L Bohn Journal: Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf Date: 2010-06 Impact factor: 2.890
Authors: Paisith Piriyawat; Miriam Smajsová; Melinda A Smith; Sanjay Pallegar; Areej Al-Wabil; Nelda M Garcia; Jan M Risser; Lemuel A Moyé; Lewis B Morgenstern Journal: Am J Epidemiol Date: 2002-12-01 Impact factor: 4.897
Authors: David L Roth; Orla C Sheehan; Jin Huang; James D Rhodes; Suzanne E Judd; Meredith Kilgore; Brett Kissela; Janet Prvu Bettger; William E Haley Journal: Int J Stroke Date: 2016-07-21 Impact factor: 5.266
Authors: Jordan B Strom; Varsha K Tanguturi; Sherif F Nagueh; Allan L Klein; Warren J Manning Journal: J Am Soc Echocardiogr Date: 2019-09-25 Impact factor: 5.251
Authors: Fenglong Xie; Lisandro D Colantonio; Jeffrey R Curtis; Monika M Safford; Emily B Levitan; George Howard; Paul Muntner Journal: Am J Epidemiol Date: 2016-09-19 Impact factor: 4.897
Authors: Jordan B Strom; Yuansong Zhao; Kamil F Faridi; Hector Tamez; Neel M Butala; Linda R Valsdottir; Jeptha Curtis; J Matthew Brennan; Changyu Shen; Mike Boulware; Jeffrey J Popma; Robert W Yeh Journal: Circ Cardiovasc Interv Date: 2019-11-07 Impact factor: 6.546
Authors: Jenny I Shen; Anjali B Saxena; Maria E Montez-Rath; Lynn Leng; Tara I Chang; Wolfgang C Winkelmayer Journal: J Nephrol Date: 2016-08-02 Impact factor: 3.902
Authors: Matthew Alcusky; Jennifer Tjia; David D McManus; Anne L Hume; Marc Fisher; Kate L Lapane Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2020-04-06 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: Julia Spoendlin; Julie M Paik; T Tsacogianis; Seoyoung C Kim; Sebastian Schneeweiss; Rishi J Desai Journal: JAMA Intern Med Date: 2019-06-01 Impact factor: 21.873