Reeves Mathew J, Nickles Adrienne V, Roberts Stacey, Hurst Rochelle, Lyon-Callo Sarah
From the Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Michigan State University, East Lansing (M.J.R.); and Michigan Department of Community Health, Lansing (A.V.N., S.R., R.H., S.L.-C.).
Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes. 2014 Sep;7(5):757-63. doi: 10.1161/CIRCOUTCOMES.113.000706. Epub 2014 Aug 26.
Accurate case ascertainment is essential for clinical registries to be valid and representative. We assessed case ascertainment in the Michigan Stroke Registry by linking to a statewide hospital discharge database (Michigan Inpatient Database [MIDB]).
In 2009, all ischemic stroke cases submitted by 30 registry hospitals were linked to ischemic stroke discharges (International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision code 433.x1, 434.x1, or 436) in the MIDB. Databases were linked using hospital, age, sex, and admission date. The MIDB was regarded as the gold standard. To assess completeness, we calculated the percent difference between the number of cases entered in the registry relative to the MIDB. To quantify accuracy, we defined sensitivity as the proportion of cases identified in the MIDB that were matched to the registry and positive predictive value as the proportion of cases identified in the registry that were matched to the MIDB. Before data linkage, 4 hospitals were known to be using a case sampling approach. The remaining 26 registry hospitals submitted 21% fewer cases (n=3403) than were found in the MIDB (n=4340). The overall sensitivity was 68.8% (95% confidence interval, 76.4%-79.3%), and positive predictive value was 87.7% (95% confidence interval, 87.4%-89.8%). The sensitivity of case ascertainment was significantly lower in teaching hospitals and primary stroke centers but was higher in the sites that used prospective case ascertainment methods.
Among registry hospitals, these results revealed relatively high levels of completeness and accuracy. Matching registry data to hospital discharge data identified hospitals that changed their case ascertainment method to a case sampling approach. This study illustrates the value of monitoring case ascertainment in stroke registries using external data sources.
准确的病例确诊对于临床登记系统的有效性和代表性至关重要。我们通过与全州范围的医院出院数据库(密歇根住院患者数据库[MIDB])相链接,评估了密歇根州卒中登记系统中的病例确诊情况。
2009年,30家登记医院提交的所有缺血性卒中病例与MIDB中的缺血性卒中出院记录(国际疾病分类第九版编码433.x1、434.x1或436)进行了链接。数据库通过医院、年龄、性别和入院日期进行链接。MIDB被视为金标准。为评估完整性,我们计算了登记系统中录入的病例数与MIDB中病例数的百分比差异。为量化准确性,我们将敏感性定义为MIDB中识别出的与登记系统匹配的病例比例,将阳性预测值定义为登记系统中识别出的与MIDB匹配的病例比例。在数据链接之前,已知有4家医院采用病例抽样方法。其余26家登记医院提交的病例数(n = 3403)比MIDB中发现的病例数(n = 4340)少21%。总体敏感性为68.8%(95%置信区间,76.4% - 79.3%),阳性预测值为87.7%(95%置信区间,87.4% - 89.
在登记医院中,这些结果显示出相对较高的完整性和准确性水平。将登记系统数据与医院出院数据进行匹配,识别出了那些将病例确诊方法改为病例抽样方法的医院。本研究说明了使用外部数据源监测卒中登记系统中病例确诊情况的价值。 8%)。教学医院和初级卒中中心的病例确诊敏感性显著较低,但采用前瞻性病例确诊方法的机构的敏感性较高。