Bonnie Bengtsson1,2, Johan Askling3,4, Jonas F Ludvigsson5,6,7,8, Hannes Hagström1,2,4. 1. Division of Hepatology, Department of Upper GI, Karolinska University Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden. 2. Unit of Gastroenterology and Rheumatology, Department of Medicine, Huddinge, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden. 3. Rheumatology, Theme Inflammation and Infection, Karolinska University Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden. 4. Clinical Epidemiology Division, Department of Medicine, Solna, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden. 5. Department of Medical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden. 6. Department of Pediatrics, Örebro University Hospital, Örebro, Sweden. 7. Division of Epidemiology and Public Health, School of Medicine, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK. 8. Department of Medicine, Columbia University College of Physicians and Surgeons, New York, NY, USA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Although cirrhosisis a major cause of liver-related mortality globally, validation studies of the administrative coding for diagnoses associated with cirrhosis are scarce. We aimed to determine the validity of the International Classification of Diseases, 10th revision (ICD-10) codes corresponding to cirrhosis and its complications in the Swedish National Patient Register (NPR). METHODS: We randomly selected 750 patients with ICD codes for either alcohol-related cirrhosis (K70.3), unspecified cirrhosis (K74.6) oesophageal varices (I85.0/I85.9), hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC, C22.0) or ascites (R18.9) registered in the NPR from 72 healthcare centres in 2000-2016. Hospitalisation events and outpatient visits in specialised care were included. Positive predictive values (PPVs) were calculated using the information in the patient charts as the gold standard. RESULTS: Complete data were obtained for 630 (of 750) patients (84%). For alcohol-related cirrhosis, 126/136 cases were correctly coded, corresponding to a PPV of 93% (95% confidence interval, 95%CI: 87-96). The PPV for cirrhosis with unspecified aetiology was 91% (121/133, 95%CI: 85-95) and 96% for oesophageal varices (118/123, 95%CI: 91-99). The PPV was lower for HCC, 84% (91/109, 95%CI: 75-90). The PPV for liver-related ascites was low, 43% (56/129, 95%CI: 35-52), as this category often consisted of non-hepatic ascites. When combining the ascites code with a code for chronic liver disease, the PPV for liver-related ascites increased to 93% (50/54, 95%CI: 82-98). CONCLUSIONS: The validity of ICD-10 codes for cirrhosis, oesophageal varices and HCC is high. However, coding for ascites should be combined with a code of chronic liver disease to have an acceptable validity.
OBJECTIVES: Although cirrhosisis a major cause of liver-related mortality globally, validation studies of the administrative coding for diagnoses associated with cirrhosis are scarce. We aimed to determine the validity of the International Classification of Diseases, 10th revision (ICD-10) codes corresponding to cirrhosis and its complications in the Swedish National Patient Register (NPR). METHODS: We randomly selected 750 patients with ICD codes for either alcohol-related cirrhosis (K70.3), unspecifiedcirrhosis (K74.6) oesophageal varices (I85.0/I85.9), hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC, C22.0) or ascites (R18.9) registered in the NPR from 72 healthcare centres in 2000-2016. Hospitalisation events and outpatient visits in specialised care were included. Positive predictive values (PPVs) were calculated using the information in the patient charts as the gold standard. RESULTS: Complete data were obtained for 630 (of 750) patients (84%). For alcohol-related cirrhosis, 126/136 cases were correctly coded, corresponding to a PPV of 93% (95% confidence interval, 95%CI: 87-96). The PPV for cirrhosis with unspecified aetiology was 91% (121/133, 95%CI: 85-95) and 96% for oesophageal varices (118/123, 95%CI: 91-99). The PPV was lower for HCC, 84% (91/109, 95%CI: 75-90). The PPV for liver-related ascites was low, 43% (56/129, 95%CI: 35-52), as this category often consisted of non-hepatic ascites. When combining the ascites code with a code for chronic liver disease, the PPV for liver-related ascites increased to 93% (50/54, 95%CI: 82-98). CONCLUSIONS: The validity of ICD-10 codes for cirrhosis, oesophageal varices and HCC is high. However, coding for ascites should be combined with a code of chronic liver disease to have an acceptable validity.
Authors: Bonnie Bengtsson; Linnea Widman; Staffan Wahlin; Per Stål; Niklas K Björkström; Hannes Hagström Journal: United European Gastroenterol J Date: 2022-05-01 Impact factor: 6.866
Authors: Jeremy Louissaint; Susan L Murphy; Christopher J Sonnenday; Anna S Lok; Elliot B Tapper Journal: Liver Transpl Date: 2021-07-31 Impact factor: 5.799
Authors: Hannes Hagström; Leon A Adams; Alina M Allen; Christopher D Byrne; Yoosoo Chang; Henning Grønbaek; Mona Ismail; Peter Jepsen; Fasiha Kanwal; Jennifer Kramer; Jeffrey V Lazarus; Michelle T Long; Rohit Loomba; Philip N Newsome; Ian A Rowe; Seungho Ryu; Jörn M Schattenberg; Marina Serper; Nick Sheron; Tracey G Simon; Elliot B Tapper; Sarah Wild; Vincent Wai-Sun Wong; Yusuf Yilmaz; Shira Zelber-Sagi; Fredrik Åberg Journal: Hepatology Date: 2021-06-22 Impact factor: 17.298
Authors: Patricia C Valery; Elizabeth E Powell; Kelly Lee Hayward; Amy L Johnson; Leigh U Horsfall; Chris Moser Journal: BMJ Open Gastroenterol Date: 2021-02
Authors: Hannes Hagström; Maja Thiele; Tracey G Simon; Rajani Sharma; Anna Röckert Tjernberg; Bjorn Roelstraete; Jonas Söderling; Jonas F Ludvigsson Journal: United European Gastroenterol J Date: 2022-01-28 Impact factor: 4.623
Authors: Jessica E Shearer; Juan J Gonzalez; Thazin Min; Richard Parker; Rebecca Jones; Grace L Su; Elliot B Tapper; Ian A Rowe Journal: Aliment Pharmacol Ther Date: 2022-02-15 Impact factor: 9.524