Department of Social and Preventive Medicine, Université Laval, Québec City, QC, Canada.
Centre de recherche du CHU de Québec-Université Laval, Québec City, QC, Canada.
Pain. 2023 Jul 1;164(7):1600-1607. doi: 10.1097/j.pain.0000000000002861. Epub 2023 Jan 5.
Identifying nonspecific low back pain (LBP) in medico-administrative databases is a major challenge because of the number and heterogeneity of existing diagnostic codes and the absence of standard definitions to use as reference. The objective of this study was to evaluate the sensitivity and specificity of algorithms for the identification of nonspecific LBP from medico-administrative data using self-report information as the reference standard. Self-report data came from the PROspective Québec Study on Work and Health , a 24-year prospective cohort study of white-collar workers. All diagnostic codes that could be associated with nonspecific LBP were identified from the International Classification of Diseases, Ninth and Tenth Revisions ( ICD-9 and ICD-10 ) in physician and hospital claims. Seven algorithms for identifying nonspecific LBP were built and compared with self-report information. Sensitivity analyses were also conducted using more stringent definitions of LBP. There were 5980 study participants with (n = 2847) and without (n = 3133) LBP included in the analyses. An algorithm that included at least 1 diagnostic code for nonspecific LBP was best to identify cases of LBP in medico-administrative data with sensitivity varying between 8.9% (95% confidence interval [CI] 7.9-10.0) for a 1-year window and 21.5% (95% CI 20.0-23.0) for a 3-year window. Specificity varied from 97.1% (95% CI 96.5-97.7) for a 1-year window to 90.4% (95% CI 89.4-91.5) for a 3-year window. The low sensitivity we found reveals that the identification of nonspecific cases of LBP in administrative data is limited, possibly due to the lack of traditional medical consultation.
在医疗管理数据库中识别非特异性下背痛(LBP)是一项重大挑战,因为现有的诊断代码数量众多且具有异质性,并且缺乏可作为参考的标准定义。本研究的目的是评估使用自我报告信息作为参考标准,从医疗管理数据中识别非特异性 LBP 的算法的敏感性和特异性。自我报告数据来自魁北克工作与健康前瞻性研究(PROspective Québec Study on Work and Health),这是一项针对白领工人的 24 年前瞻性队列研究。从医生和医院的索赔中确定了与非特异性 LBP 相关的所有诊断代码,这些代码来自国际疾病分类,第九和第十修订版(ICD-9 和 ICD-10)。构建了七种用于识别非特异性 LBP 的算法,并与自我报告信息进行了比较。还使用更严格的 LBP 定义进行了敏感性分析。分析中包括了有(n = 2847)和没有(n = 3133)LBP 的 5980 名研究参与者。包含至少一个非特异性 LBP 诊断代码的算法最适合识别医疗管理数据中的 LBP 病例,其敏感性在 1 年窗口时为 8.9%(95%置信区间 [CI] 7.9-10.0),在 3 年窗口时为 21.5%(95% CI 20.0-23.0)。特异性在 1 年窗口时为 97.1%(95% CI 96.5-97.7),在 3 年窗口时为 90.4%(95% CI 89.4-91.5)。我们发现的低敏感性表明,在行政数据中识别非特异性 LBP 病例是有限的,这可能是由于缺乏传统的医疗咨询。