Rommel Ravanan1, Dominic Taylor1, Ailish Nimmo2, Retha Steenkamp3. 1. Richard Bright Renal Service, Southmead Hospital, Bristol, BS10 5NB, UK. 2. Richard Bright Renal Service, Southmead Hospital, Bristol, BS10 5NB, UK. ailish.nimmo@nhs.net. 3. UK Renal Registry, The Renal Association, Bristol, UK.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Routine healthcare datasets capturing clinical and administrative information are increasingly being used to examine health outcomes. The accuracy of such data is not clearly defined. We examine the accuracy of diagnosis recording in individuals with advanced chronic kidney disease using a routine healthcare dataset in England with comparison to information collected by trained research nurses. METHODS: We linked records from the Access to Transplant and Transplant Outcome Measures study to the Hospital Episode Statistics dataset. International Classification of Diseases (ICD-10) and Office for Population Censuses and Surveys Classification of Interventions and Procedures (OPCS-4) codes were used to identify medical conditions from hospital data. The sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values were calculated for a range of diagnoses. RESULTS: Comorbidity information was available in 96% of individuals prior to starting kidney replacement therapy. There was variation in the accuracy of individual medical conditions identified from the routine healthcare dataset. Sensitivity and positive predictive values ranged from 97.7 and 90.4% for diabetes and 82.6 and 82.9% for ischaemic heart disease to 44.2 and 28.4% for liver disease. CONCLUSIONS: Routine healthcare datasets accurately capture certain conditions in an advanced chronic kidney disease population. They have potential for use within clinical and epidemiological research studies but are unlikely to be sufficient as a single resource for identifying a full spectrum of comorbidities.
BACKGROUND: Routine healthcare datasets capturing clinical and administrative information are increasingly being used to examine health outcomes. The accuracy of such data is not clearly defined. We examine the accuracy of diagnosis recording in individuals with advanced chronic kidney disease using a routine healthcare dataset in England with comparison to information collected by trained research nurses. METHODS: We linked records from the Access to Transplant and Transplant Outcome Measures study to the Hospital Episode Statistics dataset. International Classification of Diseases (ICD-10) and Office for Population Censuses and Surveys Classification of Interventions and Procedures (OPCS-4) codes were used to identify medical conditions from hospital data. The sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values were calculated for a range of diagnoses. RESULTS: Comorbidity information was available in 96% of individuals prior to starting kidney replacement therapy. There was variation in the accuracy of individual medical conditions identified from the routine healthcare dataset. Sensitivity and positive predictive values ranged from 97.7 and 90.4% for diabetes and 82.6 and 82.9% for ischaemic heart disease to 44.2 and 28.4% for liver disease. CONCLUSIONS: Routine healthcare datasets accurately capture certain conditions in an advanced chronic kidney disease population. They have potential for use within clinical and epidemiological research studies but are unlikely to be sufficient as a single resource for identifying a full spectrum of comorbidities.
Entities:
Keywords:
Chronic kidney disease; Comorbidity; Record linkage; Routine healthcare datasets; Secondary care
Authors: Lazarus Karamadoukis; David Ansell; Robert N Foley; Stephen Peter McDonald; Charles R V Tomson; Lilyanna Trpeski; Fergus J Caskey Journal: Nephrol Dial Transplant Date: 2009-03-04 Impact factor: 5.992
Authors: Jonas F Ludvigsson; Eva Andersson; Anders Ekbom; Maria Feychting; Jeong-Lim Kim; Christina Reuterwall; Mona Heurgren; Petra Otterblad Olausson Journal: BMC Public Health Date: 2011-06-09 Impact factor: 3.295
Authors: Gabriel C Oniscu; Rommel Ravanan; Diana Wu; Andrea Gibbons; Bernadette Li; Charles Tomson; John L Forsythe; Clare Bradley; John Cairns; Christopher Dudley; Christopher J E Watson; Eleanor M Bolton; Heather Draper; Matthew Robb; Lisa Bradbury; Rishi Pruthi; Wendy Metcalfe; Damian Fogarty; Paul Roderick; J Andrew Bradley Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2016-02-25 Impact factor: 2.692