Department of Neurology University of British Columbia Vancouver Canada.
Stanford Stroke Center Palo Alto CA.
J Am Heart Assoc. 2021 Sep 21;10(18):e021614. doi: 10.1161/JAHA.121.021614. Epub 2021 Sep 6.
Background Transition from () and ( and ) for hospital discharge data was mandated for US hospitals on October 1, 2015. We examined the volume of patients receiving thrombolysis in ischemic stroke (IS) identified using codes within this transition period in the 2015 to 2016 National Inpatient Sample, a weighted 20% sample of all inpatient US hospital discharges. Methods and Results During the period, 2 case identification strategies were used. Codes for IS were combined with: (1) only the code for thrombolytic given into a peripheral vein and (2) all new codes mapped to the code for all thrombolysis. On visual inspection there was an obvious discontinuity in the volume of patients with IS treated with IV thrombolysis corresponding to 3 time periods: (study period 1), transition (period 2), and (period 3). With Strategy 1, analysis using a linear spline with 2 knots shows that the volume of patients with IS treated with IV thrombolysis was significantly different between study periods 1 and 2 (slope difference -1880, 95% CI -2834 to -928, =0.005), and periods 2 to 3 (slope difference 1980, 95% CI 1207-2754, = 0.002). With Strategy 2, volumes did not change significantly between periods 1 to 2, though there was a significant difference between periods 2 and 3 (slope difference 719, 95% CI 91-1347, =0.034). Conclusions The significant discontinuity in thrombolysis volumes for IS during the transition period for to coding suggests that more rigorous validation of US administrative data during this time period may be necessary for research, resource planning, and quality assurance.
背景 2015 年 10 月 1 日,美国医院开始强制使用 () 和 () 对出院数据进行转换。我们在 2015 年至 2016 年国家住院患者样本(全美所有住院患者的 20%加权样本)中,检查了在此过渡期间使用 () 代码确定的缺血性中风 (IS) 患者接受溶栓治疗的数量。
方法和结果 在这一时期,我们使用了 2 种病例识别策略。将 IS 代码与以下代码结合使用:(1)仅外周静脉给予溶栓剂的 () 代码,以及(2)所有新的 () 代码映射到所有溶栓剂的 () 代码。通过直观检查,我们发现接受 IV 溶栓治疗的 IS 患者数量在 3 个时间段存在明显的不连续性:(研究期间 1)、过渡期间(期间 2)和(期间 3)。使用策略 1,使用 2 个结的线性样条分析显示,研究期间 1 和 2 之间(斜率差 -1880,95%CI-2834 至-928,=0.005)以及期间 2 和 3 之间(斜率差 1980,95%CI1207-2754,=0.002)接受 IV 溶栓治疗的 IS 患者数量存在显著差异。使用策略 2,虽然期间 2 和 3 之间存在显著差异(斜率差 719,95%CI91-1347,=0.034),但期间 1 和 2 之间的体积没有显著变化。
结论 在向 编码过渡期间,IS 的溶栓治疗量存在明显的不连续性,这表明在此期间,美国行政数据可能需要更严格的验证,以便进行研究、资源规划和质量保证。