Langley J, Stephenson S, Thorpe C, Davie G
Injury Prevention Research Unit, Department of Preventive and Social Medicine, University of Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand.
Inj Prev. 2006 Feb;12(1):58-61. doi: 10.1136/ip.2005.010173.
To determine the level of accuracy in coding for injury principal diagnosis and the first external cause code for public hospital discharges in New Zealand and determine how these levels vary by hospital size.
A simple random sample of 1800 discharges was selected from the period 1996-98 inclusive. Records were obtained from hospitals and an accredited coder coded the discharge independently of the codes already recorded in the national database.
Five percent of the principal diagnoses, 18% of the first four digits of the E-codes, and 8% of the location codes (5th digit of the E-code), were incorrect. There were no substantive differences in the level of incorrect coding between large and small hospitals.
Users of New Zealand public hospital discharge data can have a high degree of confidence in the injury diagnoses coded under ICD-9-CM-A. A similar degree of confidence is warranted for E-coding at the group level (for example, fall), but not, in general, at higher levels of specificity (for example, type of fall). For those countries continuing to use ICD-9 the study provides insight into potential problems of coding and thus guidance on where the focus of coder training should be placed. For those countries that have historical data coded according to ICD-9 it suggests that some specific injury and external cause incidence estimates may need to be treated with more caution.
确定新西兰公立医院出院时损伤主要诊断编码及首要外部原因编码的准确性水平,并确定这些水平如何因医院规模而异。
从1996年至1998年(含)期间选取1800例出院病例的简单随机样本。从医院获取记录,一名经认可的编码员独立于国家数据库中已记录的编码对出院病例进行编码。
主要诊断中有5%、E编码的前四位数字中有18%以及位置编码(E编码的第五位数字)中有8%是错误的。大医院和小医院之间的错误编码水平没有实质性差异。
新西兰公立医院出院数据的使用者可以对根据ICD - 9 - CM - A编码的损伤诊断有高度信心。对于E编码在组级水平(例如,跌倒)有类似程度的信心,但一般而言,在更高的特异性水平(例如,跌倒类型)则不然。对于那些继续使用ICD - 9的国家,该研究深入了解了编码的潜在问题,从而为编码员培训的重点应放在何处提供了指导。对于那些有根据ICD - 9编码的历史数据的国家,这表明一些特定损伤和外部原因的发病率估计可能需要更谨慎地对待。