James S Floyd1,2,3, Robert Wellman4, Sharon Fuller4, Nisha Bansal2,5, Bruce M Psaty6,2,3,4,7, Ian H de Boer2,3,5, Delia Scholes3,4. 1. Cardiovascular Health Research Unit, jfloyd@uw.edu. 2. Medicine, and. 3. Departments of Epidemiology. 4. Group Health Research Institute, Seattle, Washington. 5. Kidney Research Institute, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington; and. 6. Cardiovascular Health Research Unit. 7. Health Services, and.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Studies that use electronic health data typically identify heart failure (HF) events from hospitalizations with a principal diagnosis of HF. This approach may underestimate the total burden of HF among persons with CKD. We assessed the accuracy of algorithms for identifying validated HF events from hospitalizations and outpatient encounters, and we used this validation information to estimate the rate of HF events in a large CKD population. DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS: We identified a cohort of 15,141 adults age 18-89 years with an eGFR<60 ml/min per 1.73 m2 from 2008 to 2011. Potential HF events during follow-up were randomly sampled for validation with medical record review. Positive predictive values from the validation study were used to estimate the rate of validated HF events in the full cohort. RESULTS: A total of 1864 participants had at least one health care encounter that qualified as a potential HF event during 2.7 years of mean follow-up. Among 313 potential events that were randomly sampled for validation, positive predictive values were 92% for hospitalizations with a principal diagnosis of HF, 32% for hospitalizations with a secondary diagnosis of HF, and 70% for qualifying outpatient HF encounters. Through use of this validation information in the full cohort, the rate of validated HF events estimated from the most comprehensive algorithm that included principal and secondary diagnosis hospitalizations and outpatient encounters was 35.2 events/1000 person-years (95% confidence interval, 33.1 to 37.4), compared with 9.5 events/1000 person-years (95% confidence interval, 8.7 to 10.5) from the algorithm that included only principal diagnosis hospitalizations. Outpatient encounters accounted for 20% of the total number of validated HF events. CONCLUSIONS: In studies that rely on electronic health data, algorithms that include hospitalizations with a secondary diagnosis of HF and outpatient HF encounters more fully capture the burden of HF, although validation of HF events may be necessary with this approach.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Studies that use electronic health data typically identify heart failure (HF) events from hospitalizations with a principal diagnosis of HF. This approach may underestimate the total burden of HF among persons with CKD. We assessed the accuracy of algorithms for identifying validated HF events from hospitalizations and outpatient encounters, and we used this validation information to estimate the rate of HF events in a large CKD population. DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS: We identified a cohort of 15,141 adults age 18-89 years with an eGFR<60 ml/min per 1.73 m2 from 2008 to 2011. Potential HF events during follow-up were randomly sampled for validation with medical record review. Positive predictive values from the validation study were used to estimate the rate of validated HF events in the full cohort. RESULTS: A total of 1864 participants had at least one health care encounter that qualified as a potential HF event during 2.7 years of mean follow-up. Among 313 potential events that were randomly sampled for validation, positive predictive values were 92% for hospitalizations with a principal diagnosis of HF, 32% for hospitalizations with a secondary diagnosis of HF, and 70% for qualifying outpatient HF encounters. Through use of this validation information in the full cohort, the rate of validated HF events estimated from the most comprehensive algorithm that included principal and secondary diagnosis hospitalizations and outpatient encounters was 35.2 events/1000 person-years (95% confidence interval, 33.1 to 37.4), compared with 9.5 events/1000 person-years (95% confidence interval, 8.7 to 10.5) from the algorithm that included only principal diagnosis hospitalizations. Outpatient encounters accounted for 20% of the total number of validated HF events. CONCLUSIONS: In studies that rely on electronic health data, algorithms that include hospitalizations with a secondary diagnosis of HF and outpatient HF encounters more fully capture the burden of HF, although validation of HF events may be necessary with this approach.
Authors: Jane S Saczynski; Susan E Andrade; Leslie R Harrold; Jennifer Tjia; Sarah L Cutrona; Katherine S Dodd; Robert J Goldberg; Jerry H Gurwitz Journal: Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf Date: 2012-01 Impact factor: 2.890
Authors: Gina D Schellenbaum; Susan R Heckbert; Nicholas L Smith; Thomas D Rea; Thomas Lumley; Dalane W Kitzman; Veronique L Roger; Herman A Taylor; Bruce M Psaty Journal: Ann Epidemiol Date: 2005-06-16 Impact factor: 3.797
Authors: Kirsten Bibbins-Domingo; Glenn M Chertow; Linda F Fried; Michelle C Odden; Anne B Newman; Stephen B Kritchevsky; Tamara B Harris; Suzanne Satterfield; Steven R Cummings; Michael G Shlipak Journal: Arch Intern Med Date: 2006-07-10
Authors: R Sacha Bhatia; Jack V Tu; Douglas S Lee; Peter C Austin; Jiming Fang; Annick Haouzi; Yanyan Gong; Peter P Liu Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2006-07-20 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Lesley H Curtis; David J Whellan; Bradley G Hammill; Adrian F Hernandez; Kevin J Anstrom; Alisa M Shea; Kevin A Schulman Journal: Arch Intern Med Date: 2008-02-25
Authors: Bruce M Psaty; Joseph A Delaney; Alice M Arnold; Lesley H Curtis; Annette L Fitzpatrick; Susan R Heckbert; Barbara McKnight; Diane Ives; John S Gottdiener; Lewis H Kuller; W T Longstreth Journal: Circulation Date: 2015-11-04 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Rohan Khera; Martijn J Schuemie; Yuan Lu; Anna Ostropolets; RuiJun Chen; George Hripcsak; Patrick B Ryan; Harlan M Krumholz; Marc A Suchard Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2022-06-09 Impact factor: 3.006
Authors: Matthew J O'Brien; Susan L Karam; Amisha Wallia; Raymond H Kang; Andrew J Cooper; Nicola Lancki; Margaret R Moran; David T Liss; Theodore A Prospect; Ronald T Ackermann Journal: JAMA Netw Open Date: 2018-12-07
Authors: Caroline A Presley; Jea Young Min; Jonathan Chipman; Robert A Greevy; Carlos G Grijalva; Marie R Griffin; Christianne L Roumie Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2018-03-25 Impact factor: 2.692