• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

死亡证明死因应用国际疾病分类代码能否减少垃圾代码?

Does the Application of International Classification of Disease Codes for the Cause of Death on Death Certificates Reduce Garbage Codes?

机构信息

48538Department of Emergency Medicine, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Ulsan University Hospital, Dong-gu Ulsan, Korea.

出版信息

Inquiry. 2022 Jan-Dec;59:469580221081433. doi: 10.1177/00469580221081433.

DOI:10.1177/00469580221081433
PMID:35384751
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8990542/
Abstract

INTRODUCTION

This study aimed to determine if applying International Classification of Diseases (ICD) disease codes directly as the cause of death (COD) on death certificates (DCs) instead of writing or typing the COD could reduce the use of garbage codes.

METHODS

Beginning in April of 2016, a documentation process change was made, retiring the process of hand-writing or typing the COD onto DCs to directly applying ICD disease codes that were registered during the patient's course of treatment. The DCs issued at the emergency department (ED) 1 year before (Pre-code group) and after (Code group) applying ICD disease codes directly on DCs was instituted were retrospectively analyzed. The occurrence of garbage codes along with other major and minor errors was compared between the two groups. The investigation and judgment of errors were performed by four emergency physicians.

RESULTS

The overall garbage code occurrence in the Code group (25%) was significantly lower than that in the Pre-code group (49%). Fewer garbage codes were used in the Code group with an average of .5 in the Pre-code group and .3 in the Code group. No significant difference was identified in major error occurrences except for in the garbage codes. Minor errors were more common in the Pre-code group than in the Code group.

CONCLUSION

The overall use of garbage codes on DCs could be reduced by changing the process by which physicians complete DCs, that is, the application of documenting ICD disease codes directly as the COD on DCs.

摘要

简介

本研究旨在确定在死亡证明(DC)上直接应用国际疾病分类(ICD)疾病代码作为死因(COD),而不是手写或输入 COD,是否可以减少垃圾代码的使用。

方法

从 2016 年 4 月开始,对文件记录流程进行了更改,废除了在 DC 上手写或输入 COD 的流程,改为直接应用患者治疗过程中登记的 ICD 疾病代码。回顾性分析了在实施直接在 DC 上应用 ICD 疾病代码之前(预代码组)和之后(代码组)一年期间急诊科(ED)签发的 DC。比较了两组之间垃圾代码以及其他主要和次要错误的发生情况。由四位急诊医生对错误进行调查和判断。

结果

代码组(25%)的总体垃圾代码发生率明显低于预代码组(49%)。代码组中使用的垃圾代码较少,预代码组中平均为.5 个,代码组中为.3 个。除了垃圾代码外,主要错误的发生率没有明显差异。次要错误在预代码组中比在代码组中更常见。

结论

通过改变医生填写 DC 的流程,即直接将 ICD 疾病代码作为 COD 记录在 DC 上,可以减少 DC 上垃圾代码的总体使用。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/9613/8990542/33a5e5aca175/10.1177_00469580221081433-fig2.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/9613/8990542/dd1af126798b/10.1177_00469580221081433-fig1.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/9613/8990542/33a5e5aca175/10.1177_00469580221081433-fig2.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/9613/8990542/dd1af126798b/10.1177_00469580221081433-fig1.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/9613/8990542/33a5e5aca175/10.1177_00469580221081433-fig2.jpg

相似文献

1
Does the Application of International Classification of Disease Codes for the Cause of Death on Death Certificates Reduce Garbage Codes?死亡证明死因应用国际疾病分类代码能否减少垃圾代码?
Inquiry. 2022 Jan-Dec;59:469580221081433. doi: 10.1177/00469580221081433.
2
Garbage codes in the Norwegian Cause of Death Registry 1996-2019.1996-2019 年挪威死因登记系统中的垃圾代码。
BMC Public Health. 2022 Jul 7;22(1):1301. doi: 10.1186/s12889-022-13693-w.
3
Cause of death certificates in nursing homes: Does quality matter? A retrospective review from two counties in Norway.养老院死亡原因证明:质量重要吗?挪威两个县的回顾性研究。
Scand J Public Health. 2024 Aug;52(6):711-717. doi: 10.1177/14034948231187512. Epub 2023 Jul 26.
4
Death Certification Errors and the Effect on Mortality Statistics.死亡证明错误及其对死亡率统计的影响。
Public Health Rep. 2017 Nov/Dec;132(6):669-675. doi: 10.1177/0033354917736514. Epub 2017 Nov 1.
5
Do Death Certificate Errors Decrease as Clinical Experience in an Emergency Department Increases?随着在急诊科室的临床经验的增加,死亡证明的错误是否会减少?
J Korean Med Sci. 2024 Feb 26;39(7):e62. doi: 10.3346/jkms.2024.39.e62.
6
Evaluating the accuracy of International Classification of Disease Perinatal Mortality (ICD-PM) codes assigned on death certificates before and after expert panel review: a mixed methods observational study.评估国际疾病分类围产儿死亡率(ICD-PM)编码在专家小组审查前后死亡证明中的准确性:一项混合方法观察性研究。
BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2024 Oct 3;24(1):643. doi: 10.1186/s12884-024-06855-8.
7
[Analysis of Coding Quality of Death Certificates and Autopsy Rates in Chemnitz: 2010-2013].[开姆尼茨死亡证明编码质量与尸检率分析:2010 - 2013年]
Gesundheitswesen. 2020 Apr;82(4):354-360. doi: 10.1055/a-0820-3452. Epub 2019 Jan 21.
8
Investigation of garbage code deaths to improve the quality of cause-of-death in Brazil: results from a pilot study.调查巴西垃圾代码死亡情况以提高死因质量:一项试点研究的结果
Rev Bras Epidemiol. 2019 Nov 28;22Suppl 3(Suppl 3):e19004.supl.3. doi: 10.1590/1980-549720190004.supl.3. eCollection 2019.
9
Heart failure quantified by underlying cause and multiple cause of death in Brazil between 2006 and 2016.2006 年至 2016 年巴西按根本病因和多种死因量化的心力衰竭。
BMC Public Health. 2021 Nov 15;21(1):2100. doi: 10.1186/s12889-021-12173-x.
10
Application of a Modified Garbage Code Algorithm to Estimate Cause-Specific Mortality and Years of Life Lost in Korea.一种改进的垃圾代码算法在韩国特定病因死亡率和寿命损失年数估计中的应用。
J Korean Med Sci. 2016 Nov;31 Suppl 2(Suppl 2):S121-S128. doi: 10.3346/jkms.2016.31.S2.S121.

引用本文的文献

1
Do Death Certificate Errors Decrease as Clinical Experience in an Emergency Department Increases?随着在急诊科室的临床经验的增加,死亡证明的错误是否会减少?
J Korean Med Sci. 2024 Feb 26;39(7):e62. doi: 10.3346/jkms.2024.39.e62.
2
Quality of death certificates completion for COVID-19 cases in the southeast of Iran: A cross-sectional study.伊朗东南部新冠病毒病病例死亡证明填写质量:一项横断面研究。
Health Sci Rep. 2022 Sep 6;5(5):e802. doi: 10.1002/hsr2.802. eCollection 2022 Sep.

本文引用的文献

1
Common errors in reporting cause-of-death statement on death certificates: A systematic review and meta-analysis.死亡证明中死因报告常见错误:系统评价和荟萃分析。
J Forensic Leg Med. 2021 Aug;82:102220. doi: 10.1016/j.jflm.2021.102220. Epub 2021 Jul 22.
2
Death certificate errors in three teaching hospitals of Zahedan, southeast of Iran.伊朗东南部扎黑丹的三家教学医院中的死亡证明错误。
Death Stud. 2022;46(5):1157-1165. doi: 10.1080/07481187.2020.1801893. Epub 2020 Aug 6.
3
Improving the quality of cause of death data for public health policy: are all 'garbage' codes equally problematic?
提高用于公共卫生政策的死因数据质量:所有“垃圾”编码的问题都一样大吗?
BMC Med. 2020 Mar 9;18(1):55. doi: 10.1186/s12916-020-01525-w.
4
Death Certification in Northern Alberta: Error Occurrence Rate and Educational Intervention.阿尔伯塔省北部的死亡证明:错误发生率与教育干预
Am J Forensic Med Pathol. 2020 Mar;41(1):11-17. doi: 10.1097/PAF.0000000000000527.
5
Garbage codes assigned as cause-of-death in health statistics.在健康统计中被列为死因的垃圾编码。
Rev Bras Epidemiol. 2019 Nov 28;22 Suppl 3:e19001.supl.3. doi: 10.1590/1980-549720190001.supl.3.
6
Death Certification: Errors and Interventions.死亡证明:错误与干预措施
Clin Med Res. 2020 Mar;18(1):21-26. doi: 10.3121/cmr.2019.1496. Epub 2019 Oct 9.
7
The implementation of an automated coding system for cause-of-death statistics.死因统计自动化编码系统的实施。
Inform Health Soc Care. 2020 Jan;45(1):1-14. doi: 10.1080/17538157.2018.1496092. Epub 2018 Aug 20.
8
The quality of death certification practice in Greece.希腊死亡证明开具工作的质量
Hippokratia. 2016 Jan-Mar;20(1):19-25.
9
Application of a Modified Garbage Code Algorithm to Estimate Cause-Specific Mortality and Years of Life Lost in Korea.一种改进的垃圾代码算法在韩国特定病因死亡率和寿命损失年数估计中的应用。
J Korean Med Sci. 2016 Nov;31 Suppl 2(Suppl 2):S121-S128. doi: 10.3346/jkms.2016.31.S2.S121.
10
Automatic coding and selection of causes of death: an adaptation of Iris software for using in Brazil.死亡原因的自动编码与选择:Iris软件在巴西使用的改编版
Rev Bras Epidemiol. 2015 Oct-Dec;18(4):883-93. doi: 10.1590/1980-5497201500040016.