Hurley Robert W, Bland Khadijah T, Chaskes Mira D, Hill Elaine L, Adams Meredith C B
Department of Anesthesiology, Wake Forest University School of Medicine, Medical Center Boulevard, Winston-Salem, NC 27157, United States.
Department of Translational Neuroscience, Wake Forest University School of Medicine, Medical Center Boulevard, Winston-Salem, NC 27157, United States.
Pain Med. 2025 Jul 1;26(7):372-396. doi: 10.1093/pm/pnaf019.
To evaluate current administrative coding practices for opioid misuse (OM) within the World Health Organization's International Classification of Diseases (ICD) framework and develop standardized documentation recommendations.
Systematic scoping review following PRISMA-ScR guidelines.
Analysis of studies using administrative databases, including electronic health records (EHRs), insurance claims, and national healthcare utilization databases.
Studies published in peer-reviewed journals examining administrative codes for OM, excluding those focused solely on illicit drugs, opioid use disorder (OUD), or using only natural language processing/qualitative methods.
Comprehensive search of Embase, Medline, Google Scholar, and PubMed databases following PRISMA-S extension guidelines. Three independent reviewers screened articles and extracted data. Study quality was assessed using a modified Newcastle-Ottawa Scale.
Of 9561 initial records, 19 studies met inclusion criteria. The use of ICD-10 code F11.9* (Opioid use) emerged as the most referenced method for documenting OM, distinguishing it from OUD methods (F11.1, opioid abuse; F11.2, opioid dependence). Studies demonstrated significant heterogeneity in coding practices, resulting in code-based definitions identifying only approximately 50% of cases compared to more comprehensive clinical assessment approaches.
While ICD-10 code F11.9* can effectively document OM as distinct from OUD, successful implementation requires consensus on the clinical definition of OM and documentation in the form of clear clinical guidelines and operationalized through enhanced EHR integration. Future research should focus on validating these approaches across diverse healthcare settings.
评估世界卫生组织《国际疾病分类》(ICD)框架内当前针对阿片类药物滥用(OM)的管理编码实践,并制定标准化的文件记录建议。
遵循PRISMA-ScR指南进行系统的范围综述。
对使用管理数据库的研究进行分析,包括电子健康记录(EHR)、保险理赔和国家医疗保健利用数据库。
发表在同行评审期刊上的研究,这些研究检查了OM的管理编码,不包括那些仅关注非法药物、阿片类药物使用障碍(OUD)或仅使用自然语言处理/定性方法的研究。
遵循PRISMA-S扩展指南,对Embase、Medline、谷歌学术和PubMed数据库进行全面检索。三名独立评审员筛选文章并提取数据。使用改良的纽卡斯尔-渥太华量表评估研究质量。
在9561条初始记录中,19项研究符合纳入标准。使用ICD-10编码F11.9*(阿片类药物使用)成为记录OM最常被引用的方法,将其与OUD方法(F11.1,阿片类药物滥用;F11.2,阿片类药物依赖)区分开来。研究表明编码实践存在显著异质性,与更全面的临床评估方法相比,基于编码的定义仅能识别约50%的病例。
虽然ICD-10编码F11.9*可以有效地将OM与OUD区分开来进行记录,但成功实施需要就OM的临床定义达成共识,并以明确的临床指南形式进行记录,并通过加强EHR整合来实施。未来的研究应侧重于在不同的医疗环境中验证这些方法。