Departments of Pediatric Critical Care Medicine, Pediatrics and
Health Research and Policy, School of Medicine, Stanford University, Palo Alto, California; and.
Pediatrics. 2019 Feb;143(2). doi: 10.1542/peds.2018-1487. Epub 2019 Jan 9.
Administrative databases may allow true population-based studies and quality improvement endeavors, but the accuracy of billing codes for capturing key risk factors and outcomes needs to be assessed. We sought to describe the performance of a statewide administrative database and the clinical database from the California Perinatal Quality Care Collaborative (CPQCC).
This population-based retrospective cohort study linked key perinatal risk factors and outcomes from the 133-unit CPQCC database to relevant billing codes from administrative maternal and newborn inpatient discharge records, for 50 631 infants born from 2006 to 2012. Using the CPQCC record as the gold standard, we calculated the positive predictive value, negative predictive value, and Matthews correlation coefficient for each item, then evaluated comparative performance across units.
The Matthews correlation coefficient was highest (>0.7; strong positive correlation) for multiple delivery, Cesarean delivery, very low birth weight, maternal hypertension, maternal diabetes, patent ductus arteriosus, in-hospital death, patent ductus arteriosus and retinopathy of prematurity surgeries, extracorporeal life support, and intraventricular hemorrhage. Maternal chorioamnionitis, fetal distress, retinopathy of prematurity staging, chronic lung disease, and pneumothorax were the least reliably coded. Maternal factors and delivery details were more reliably coded in the maternal inpatient record than the newborn inpatient record.
Several important perinatal risk factors and outcomes are highly congruent between these administrative and clinical databases. Several subjective risk factors and outcomes are appropriate targets for data improvement initiatives. The ability for timely extraction of administrative inpatient data will be key to their usefulness in quality metrics.
行政数据库可用于真正的基于人群的研究和质量改进工作,但计费代码捕捉关键风险因素和结局的准确性需要进行评估。我们旨在描述全州范围内行政数据库和加利福尼亚围产期质量协作(CPQCC)临床数据库的性能。
这项基于人群的回顾性队列研究将 CPQCC 数据库中的关键围产期风险因素和结局与行政产妇和新生儿住院记录中的相关计费代码相关联,共纳入了 50631 名 2006 年至 2012 年出生的婴儿。以 CPQCC 记录作为金标准,我们计算了每个项目的阳性预测值、阴性预测值和马修斯相关系数,然后评估了各单位之间的比较性能。
马修斯相关系数最高(>0.7;强正相关)的项目为多胎分娩、剖宫产、极低出生体重、产妇高血压、产妇糖尿病、动脉导管未闭、院内死亡、动脉导管未闭和早产儿视网膜病变手术、体外生命支持和脑室内出血。母体绒毛膜羊膜炎、胎儿窘迫、早产儿视网膜病变分期、慢性肺部疾病和气胸编码最不可靠。产妇因素和分娩细节在产妇住院记录中的编码比新生儿住院记录更可靠。
这些行政和临床数据库中,几个重要的围产期风险因素和结局高度一致。一些主观的风险因素和结局是数据改进计划的合适目标。及时提取行政住院数据的能力将是其在质量指标中的有用性的关键。