Pharmacy Department, Kaiser Permanente Colorado, Aurora, CO, United States of America.
Department of Clinical Pharmacy, University of Colorado Skaggs School of Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Sciences, Aurora, CO, United States of America.
PLoS One. 2020 Apr 7;15(4):e0231100. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0231100. eCollection 2020.
Elective percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI) are difficult to discriminate from non-elective PCI in administrative data due to non-specific encounter codes, limiting the ability to track outcomes, ensure appropriate medical management, and/or perform research on patients who undergo elective PCI. The objective of this study was to assess the abilities of several algorithms to identify elective PCI procedures using administrative data containing diagnostic, utilization, and/or procedural codes.
For this retrospective study, administrative databases in an integrated healthcare delivery system were queried between 1/1/2015 and 6/31/2016 to identify patients who had an encounter for a PCI. Using clinical criteria, each encounter was classified via chart review as a valid PCI, then as elective or non-elective. Cases were tested against nine pre-determined algorithms. Performance statistics (sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value) and associated 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated. Of 521 PCI encounters reviewed, 497 were valid PCI, 93 of which were elective. An algorithm that excluded emergency room visit events had the highest sensitivity (97.9%, 95%CI 92.5%-99.7%) while an algorithm that included events occurring within 90 days of a cardiologist visit and coronary angiogram or stress test had the highest positive predictive value (62.2%, 95%CI 50.8%-72.7%).
Without an encounter code specific for elective PCI, an algorithm excluding procedures associated with an emergency room visit had the highest sensitivity to identify elective PCI. This offers a reasonable approach to identify elective PCI from administrative data.
由于行政数据中不特定的就诊代码,择期经皮冠状动脉介入治疗(PCI)与非择期 PCI 难以区分,这限制了对接受择期 PCI 患者的跟踪结果、确保适当的医疗管理和/或开展研究的能力。本研究旨在评估几种算法在包含诊断、使用和/或手术代码的行政数据中识别择期 PCI 手术的能力。
本回顾性研究在一体化医疗服务系统的行政数据库中查询了 2015 年 1 月 1 日至 2016 年 6 月 31 日期间进行 PCI 就诊的患者。通过临床标准,每份就诊记录均通过病历审查分为有效 PCI,然后分为择期或非择期。将病例与九个预先确定的算法进行测试。计算了性能统计数据(敏感性、特异性、阳性预测值和阴性预测值)及其相关的 95%置信区间(CI)。在 521 次 PCI 就诊记录中,497 次为有效 PCI,其中 93 次为择期。一种排除急诊就诊事件的算法具有最高的敏感性(97.9%,95%CI 92.5%-99.7%),而一种包括在心脏病专家就诊和冠状动脉造影或压力测试后 90 天内发生的事件的算法具有最高的阳性预测值(62.2%,95%CI 50.8%-72.7%)。
在没有专门针对择期 PCI 的就诊代码的情况下,排除与急诊就诊相关的手术的算法对识别择期 PCI 具有最高的敏感性。这为从行政数据中识别择期 PCI 提供了一种合理的方法。