Taha Mohamed, Habib Mamoon, Lomachinsky Victor, Hadar Peter, Newhouse Joseph P, Schwamm Lee H, Blacker Deborah, Moura Lidia M V R
Department of Neurology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
BMJ Neurol Open. 2024 Oct 2;6(2):e000831. doi: 10.1136/bmjno-2024-000831. eCollection 2024.
The National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) scores have been used to evaluate acute ischaemic stroke (AIS) severity in clinical settings. Through the International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision Code (ICD-10), documentation of NIHSS scores has been made possible for administrative purposes and has since been increasingly adopted in insurance claims. Per Centres for Medicare & Medicaid Services guidelines, the stroke ICD-10 diagnosis code must be documented by the treating physician. Accuracy of the administratively collected NIHSS compared with expert clinical evaluation as documented in the Paul Coverdell registry is however still uncertain.
Leveraging a linked dataset comprised of the Paul Coverdell National Acute Stroke Program (PCNASP) clinical registry and matched individuals on Medicare Claims data, we sampled patients aged 65 and above admitted for AIS across nine states, from January 2017 to December 2020. We excluded those lacking documentation for either clinical or ICD-10-based NIHSS scores. We then examined score concordance from both databases and measured discordance as the absolute difference between the PCNASP and ICD-10-based NIHSS scores.
Among 87 996 matched patients, mean NIHSS scores for PCNASP and Medicare ICD-10 were 7.19 (95% CI 7.14 to 7.24) and 7.32 (95% CI 7.27 to 7.37), respectively. Concordance between the two scores was high as indicated by an intraclass correlation coefficient of 0.93.
The high concordance between clinical and ICD-10 NIHSS scores highlights the latter's potential as measure of stroke severity derived from structured claims data.
美国国立卫生研究院卒中量表(NIHSS)评分已用于临床评估急性缺血性卒中(AIS)的严重程度。通过国际疾病分类第十版代码(ICD-10),NIHSS评分的记录已用于行政目的,并且此后在保险理赔中越来越多地被采用。根据医疗保险和医疗补助服务中心的指南,卒中ICD-10诊断代码必须由治疗医生记录。然而,与保罗·科弗代尔登记处记录的专家临床评估相比,行政收集的NIHSS的准确性仍不确定。
利用由保罗·科弗代尔国家急性卒中项目(PCNASP)临床登记处和医疗保险理赔数据匹配个体组成的关联数据集,我们对2017年1月至2020年12月期间九个州因AIS入院的65岁及以上患者进行了抽样。我们排除了那些缺乏临床或基于ICD-10的NIHSS评分记录的患者。然后,我们检查了两个数据库的评分一致性,并将不一致性衡量为PCNASP和基于ICD-10的NIHSS评分之间的绝对差异。
在87996名匹配患者中,PCNASP和医疗保险ICD-10的平均NIHSS评分分别为7.19(95%CI 7.14至7.24)和7.32(95%CI 7.27至7.37)。组内相关系数为0.93,表明两个评分之间的一致性很高。
临床和ICD-10 NIHSS评分之间的高度一致性突出了后者作为从结构化理赔数据得出的卒中严重程度测量指标的潜力。