Adult Cancer Program, Prince of Wales Clinical School, Lowy Cancer Research Centre, University of New South Wales, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
BMC Health Serv Res. 2012 Sep 21;12:331. doi: 10.1186/1472-6963-12-331.
Population-level health administrative datasets such as hospital discharge data are used increasingly to evaluate health services and outcomes of care. However information about the accuracy of Australian discharge data in identifying cancer, associated procedures and comorbidity is limited. The Admitted Patients Data Collection (APDC) is a census of inpatient hospital discharges in the state of New South Wales (NSW). Our aim was to assess the accuracy of the APDC in identifying upper gastro-intestinal (upper GI) cancer cases, procedures for associated curative resection and comorbidities at the time of admission compared to data abstracted from medical records (the 'gold standard').
We reviewed the medical records of 240 patients with an incident upper GI cancer diagnosis derived from a clinical database in one NSW area health service from July 2006 to June 2007. Extracted case record data was matched to APDC discharge data to determine sensitivity, positive predictive value (PPV) and agreement between the two data sources (κ-coefficient).
The accuracy of the APDC diagnostic codes in identifying site-specific incident cancer ranged from 80-95% sensitivity. This was comparable to the accuracy of APDC procedure codes in identifying curative resection for upper GI cancer. PPV ranged from 42-80% for cancer diagnosis and 56-93% for curative surgery. Agreement between the data sources was >0.72 for most cancer diagnoses and curative resections. However, APDC discharge data was less accurate in reporting common comorbidities - for each condition, sensitivity ranged from 9-70%, whilst agreement ranged from κ = 0.64 for diabetes down to κ < 0.01 for gastro-oesophageal reflux disorder.
Identifying incident cases of upper GI cancer and curative resection from hospital administrative data is satisfactory but under-ascertained. Linkage of multiple population-health datasets is advisable to maximise case ascertainment and minimise false-positives. Consideration must be given when utilising hospital discharge data alone for generating comorbidity indices, as disease burden at the time of admission is under-reported.
人口水平的健康行政数据集,如住院数据,越来越多地被用于评估卫生服务和护理结果。然而,关于澳大利亚出院数据在识别癌症、相关手术和合并症方面的准确性的信息有限。入院患者数据收集(APDC)是新南威尔士州(新州)住院患者的普查。我们的目的是评估 APDC 在识别上消化道(上 GI)癌症病例、相关根治性切除术和入院时合并症方面的准确性,与从病历中提取的数据(“金标准”)相比。
我们回顾了新州一个地区卫生服务机构的一个临床数据库中 240 例上 GI 癌症病例的病历。从 APDC 出院数据中提取病例记录数据,以确定两种数据源之间的敏感性、阳性预测值(PPV)和一致性(κ 系数)。
APDC 诊断代码识别特定部位的新发癌症的准确性为 80-95%的敏感性。这与 APDC 手术代码识别上 GI 癌症根治性切除术的准确性相当。癌症诊断的 PPV 范围为 42-80%,根治性手术的 PPV 范围为 56-93%。大多数癌症诊断和根治性切除术的两种数据源之间的一致性>0.72。然而,APDC 出院数据在报告常见合并症方面的准确性较低 - 对于每种情况,敏感性范围为 9-70%,而一致性范围为 κ=0.64 用于糖尿病,到 κ<0.01 用于胃食管反流病。
从医院行政数据中识别上 GI 癌症和根治性切除术的新发病例是令人满意的,但发现的病例不足。建议将多个人群健康数据集进行链接,以最大限度地发现病例并减少假阳性。在利用住院患者数据单独生成合并症指数时,必须考虑到入院时的疾病负担报告不足的问题。