Spanish Centre for Pharmacoepidemiologic Research (CEIFE), Madrid, Spain.
Bayer AB, Stockholm, Sweden.
Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf. 2019 Feb;28(2):148-155. doi: 10.1002/pds.4580. Epub 2018 Jun 27.
The purpose of the study is to evaluate the impact of validation on the identification of major bleeding events in The Health Improvement Network (THIN) database in patients receiving anticoagulant therapy.
Patients aged 2 to 89 years with a first prescription for an anticoagulant (rivaroxaban or warfarin) between 2012 and 2015 were identified in THIN. Major bleeding events, defined as bleeding events necessitating hospitalization or referral to accident and emergency services or a specialist clinic, were identified using a 2-step ascertainment process based on read codes only, and then validated using a 2-step process requiring manual review of patients' records.
The positive predictive value for the ascertainment of major intracranial (IC) bleeds using only read codes was 96.9%, compared with 70.4% for gastrointestinal (GI) bleeds and 64.1% for urogenital (UG) bleeds. The incidence rate of major IC bleeding events was therefore similar when it was calculated before and after validation (0.32 per 100 person-years and 0.31 per 100 person-years, respectively). The incidence rate of major GI bleeds identified using read codes alone was reduced following validation from 2.05 to 0.94 per 100 person-years, and that of major UG bleeds decreased from 2.45 to 1.11 per 100 person-years.
Major GI and UG bleeding events ascertained from THIN using read codes require validation using additional information to prevent outcome misclassification. The absence of validation may lead to overestimated incidence rates of major bleeding for GI and UG bleeds.
本研究旨在评估验证对在接受抗凝治疗的患者中,从 The Health Improvement Network (THIN) 数据库中识别主要出血事件的影响。
在 THIN 中确定了 2012 年至 2015 年间首次开处方抗凝剂(利伐沙班或华法林)的 2 至 89 岁患者。主要出血事件定义为需要住院或转至急诊或专科诊所的出血事件,仅使用阅读代码通过两步确定过程进行识别,并使用需要手动审查患者记录的两步验证过程进行验证。
仅使用阅读代码确定主要颅内 (IC) 出血的阳性预测值为 96.9%,而胃肠道 (GI) 出血为 70.4%,泌尿生殖道 (UG) 出血为 64.1%。因此,在验证前后计算主要 IC 出血事件的发生率相似(分别为 0.32 例/100 人年和 0.31 例/100 人年)。仅使用阅读代码确定的主要 GI 出血事件的发生率在验证后从 2.05 降至 0.94 例/100 人年,而主要 UG 出血事件的发生率从 2.45 降至 1.11 例/100 人年。
从 THIN 使用阅读代码确定的主要 GI 和 UG 出血事件需要使用其他信息进行验证,以防止结果分类错误。如果没有验证,可能会导致 GI 和 UG 出血的主要出血发生率高估。