From the Department of Epidemiology, Biostatistics and Occupational Health, McGill University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.
Department of Neurology and Neurosurgery, McGill University-McGill University Health Centre, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.
Epidemiology. 2018 Nov;29(6):876-884. doi: 10.1097/EDE.0000000000000888.
Traumatic brain injury surveillance provides information for allocating resources to prevention efforts. Administrative data are widely available and inexpensive but may underestimate traumatic brain injury burden by misclassifying cases. Moreover, previous studies evaluating the accuracy of administrative data surveillance case definitions were at risk of bias by using imperfect diagnostic definitions as reference standards. We assessed the accuracy (sensitivity/specificity) of traumatic brain injury surveillance case definitions in administrative data, without using a reference standard, to estimate incidence accurately.
We used administrative data from a 25% random sample of Montreal residents from 2000 to 2014. We used hierarchical Bayesian latent class models to estimate the accuracy of widely used traumatic brain injury case definitions based on the International Classification of Diseases, or on head radiologic examinations, covering the full injury spectrum in children, adults, and the elderly. We estimated measurement error-adjusted age- and severity-specific incidence.
The adjusted traumatic brain injury incidence was 76 (95% CrI = 68, 85) per 10,000 person-years (underestimated as 54 [95% CrI = 54, 55] per 10,000 without adjustment). The most sensitive case definitions were radiologic examination claims in adults/elderly (0.48; 95% CrI = 0.43, 0.55 and 0.66; 95% CrI = 0.54, 0.79) and emergency department claims in children (0.45; 95% CrI = 0.39, 0.52). The most specific case definitions were inpatient claims and discharge abstracts (0.99; 95% CrI = 0.99, 1.00). We noted strong secular trends in case definition accuracy.
Administrative data remain a useful tool for conducting traumatic brain injury surveillance and epidemiologic research when measurement error is adjusted for.
创伤性脑损伤监测提供了用于分配预防资源的信息。行政数据广泛可用且价格低廉,但可能会通过错误分类病例而低估创伤性脑损伤负担。此外,以前评估行政数据监测病例定义准确性的研究存在偏倚风险,因为它们将不完善的诊断定义用作参考标准。我们评估了行政数据中创伤性脑损伤监测病例定义的准确性(敏感性/特异性),而无需使用参考标准来准确估计发病率。
我们使用了 2000 年至 2014 年来自蒙特利尔 25%随机居民的行政数据。我们使用分层贝叶斯潜在类别模型,根据国际疾病分类或头部放射学检查,估算广泛使用的创伤性脑损伤病例定义的准确性,涵盖了儿童、成人和老年人的全损伤谱。我们估计了经测量误差调整的年龄和严重程度特异性发病率。
调整后的创伤性脑损伤发病率为每 10000 人年 76 例(95%置信区间= 68,85)(未经调整时为每 10000 人 54 例[95%置信区间= 54,55])。最敏感的病例定义是成人/老年人的放射学检查(0.48;95%置信区间= 0.43,0.55 和 0.66;95%置信区间= 0.54,0.79)和儿童的急诊就诊(0.45;95%置信区间= 0.39,0.52)。最特异的病例定义是住院和出院摘要(0.99;95%置信区间= 0.99,1.00)。我们注意到病例定义准确性存在强烈的时间趋势。
当调整测量误差时,行政数据仍然是进行创伤性脑损伤监测和流行病学研究的有用工具。