Melse Puck E, Vrolijk J Juliet, Becherer Babette E, Stangenberger Vincent A, Winkelmolen Christijn, Hommes Juliette E, Rakhorst Hinne A, Mureau Marc A M
Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, University Medical Center Rotterdam, Rotterdam, the Netherlands; Dutch Institute for Clinical Auditing, Leiden, the Netherlands.
Dutch Institute for Clinical Auditing, Leiden, the Netherlands; Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Maastricht University Medical Center+, Maastricht, the Netherlands.
J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg. 2024 Dec;99:96-102. doi: 10.1016/j.bjps.2024.08.051. Epub 2024 Aug 13.
The Dutch Breast Implant Registry (DBIR) provides real-time population-based data to monitor and improve the quality and safety of breast implants and to trace patients in the event of an (inter)national recall. To serve these main goals, the capture rate and percentage of implants that are actually registered should be known and data should be complete. This study aimed to describe an automated verification process for capture rates and data completeness using medical billing data as the external source.
DBIR-data on reconstructive permanent breast implants and tissue expanders (TEs) from 2019 were compared to medical billing data. At the hospital level, the capture rate of DBIR and accuracy of the selected data points were assessed.
In total, 2389 implants (1420 patients) were included from 12 participating hospitals (11% of all healthcare institutions registering in DBIR). DBIR had capture rates of 99% to 114% for inserted permanent implants and TEs and 49% for explanted permanent implants and TEs. Among the 9015 data points analyzed in DBIR, 8861 (98%) matched the medical billing data. Mastopexy had the highest matching percentage (100%) and capsulectomy the lowest (86%).
This study showed varying capture rates in DBIR depending on the intervention group, indicating that registration of DBIR-data and medical billing codes could be further optimized. Data accuracy was high as only 2% of data points did not correspond to medical billing data. For future data verification, other external data sources could be explored, including sources that enable verification of cosmetic implants.
荷兰乳房植入物登记处(DBIR)提供基于人群的实时数据,以监测和提高乳房植入物的质量和安全性,并在(国际)召回事件中追踪患者。为实现这些主要目标,应了解实际登记的植入物捕获率和百分比,且数据应完整。本研究旨在描述一种使用医疗计费数据作为外部来源的捕获率和数据完整性自动验证过程。
将2019年DBIR中关于重建性永久性乳房植入物和组织扩张器(TE)的数据与医疗计费数据进行比较。在医院层面,评估DBIR的捕获率和所选数据点的准确性。
总共从12家参与医院纳入了2389个植入物(1420名患者)(占在DBIR注册的所有医疗机构的11%)。对于植入的永久性植入物和TE,DBIR的捕获率为99%至114%,对于取出的永久性植入物和TE,捕获率为49%。在DBIR分析的9015个数据点中,8861个(98%)与医疗计费数据匹配。乳房固定术的匹配百分比最高(100%),包膜切除术最低(86%)。
本研究表明,DBIR的捕获率因干预组而异,这表明DBIR数据和医疗计费代码的登记可以进一步优化。数据准确性很高,因为只有2%的数据点与医疗计费数据不符。对于未来的数据验证,可以探索其他外部数据源,包括能够验证美容植入物的数据源。