Nathan S Ramrakhiani1, Michael H Le1, Yee Hui Yeo1, An K Le1, Mayumi Maeda1, Mindie H Nguyen2. 1. Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Stanford University Medical Center, Palo Alto, California, USA. 2. Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Stanford University Medical Center, Palo Alto, California, USA, Mindiehn@stanford.edu.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Accurate identification of patients with cirrhosis is important for research using administrative databases. We aimed to examine the accuracy of several major ICD-10 codes for cirrhosis diagnosis in a large and diverse patient cohort; there is little existing research on this topic. METHODS: Using data from 3,396 patients with chronic liver disease (hepatitis B or C or nonalcoholic fatty liver disease) from 1 university and several community medical centers, we calculated sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value, and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) for several major ICD-10 codes for cirrhosis, which was verified by individual chart review. We performed a secondary validation in a general cohort of 1,560 randomly selected patients. RESULTS: While each of the individual study ICD-10 codes were specific (98.08-100%), none of the codes were sufficiently sensitive (0.27-55.70%). PPVs were high in the chronic liver disease cohort (88.41-100%) but lower in the general population (55.53-66.76%). The AUROC for having at least 1 code was higher (0.79) than any code alone (0.50-0.65). DISCUSSION/ CONCLUSION: Individual ICD-10 codes are suboptimal for identifying patients with cirrhosis in the general patient population. We recommend conditioning ICD-10 code searches with a chronic liver disease diagnosis code and/or combining diagnostic codes to maximize performance.
INTRODUCTION: Accurate identification of patients with cirrhosis is important for research using administrative databases. We aimed to examine the accuracy of several major ICD-10 codes for cirrhosis diagnosis in a large and diverse patient cohort; there is little existing research on this topic. METHODS: Using data from 3,396 patients with chronic liver disease (hepatitis B or C or nonalcoholic fatty liver disease) from 1 university and several community medical centers, we calculated sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value, and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) for several major ICD-10 codes for cirrhosis, which was verified by individual chart review. We performed a secondary validation in a general cohort of 1,560 randomly selected patients. RESULTS: While each of the individual study ICD-10 codes were specific (98.08-100%), none of the codes were sufficiently sensitive (0.27-55.70%). PPVs were high in the chronic liver disease cohort (88.41-100%) but lower in the general population (55.53-66.76%). The AUROC for having at least 1 code was higher (0.79) than any code alone (0.50-0.65). DISCUSSION/ CONCLUSION: Individual ICD-10 codes are suboptimal for identifying patients with cirrhosis in the general patient population. We recommend conditioning ICD-10 code searches with a chronic liver disease diagnosis code and/or combining diagnostic codes to maximize performance.
Authors: Steven Scaglione; Stephanie Kliethermes; Guichan Cao; David Shoham; Ramon Durazo; Amy Luke; Michael L Volk Journal: J Clin Gastroenterol Date: 2015-09 Impact factor: 3.062
Authors: J R Kramer; J A Davila; E D Miller; P Richardson; T P Giordano; H B El-Serag Journal: Aliment Pharmacol Ther Date: 2007-11-08 Impact factor: 8.171
Authors: Mahendra S Nehra; Ying Ma; Christopher Clark; Ruben Amarasingham; Don C Rockey; Amit G Singal Journal: J Clin Gastroenterol Date: 2013 May-Jun Impact factor: 3.062
Authors: Beom Kyung Kim; Do Young Kim; Jun Yong Park; Sang Hoon Ahn; Chae Yoon Chon; Ja Kyung Kim; Yong Han Paik; Kwan Sik Lee; Young Nyun Park; Kwang Hyub Han Journal: Liver Int Date: 2010-01-13 Impact factor: 5.828
Authors: Ali A Mokdad; Alan D Lopez; Saied Shahraz; Rafael Lozano; Ali H Mokdad; Jeff Stanaway; Christopher J L Murray; Mohsen Naghavi Journal: BMC Med Date: 2014-09-18 Impact factor: 8.775