Studney D R, Hakstian A R
Am J Public Health. 1981 Feb;71(2):145-9. doi: 10.2105/ajph.71.2.145.
The degree of similarity between diagnostic information furnished with claims and that simultaneously entered into the medical record was estimated for 1,215 private office visits in British Columbia, Canada. For each visit, claim card and chart diagnoses were compared by having three independent internists (blinded to source and type of the data) make judgments about each diagnostic pair. The judges were highly consistent internally and their judgments were stable over time. In 40 per cent of cases chart and claims data were judged dissimilar, and in 38 per cent of cases claims data were judged more valuable as a reflection of the primary problem treated. The degree of judged similarity of chart and claims data correlated significantly and negatively with physician workload, income, and judges' preference for the billing card diagnosis. We conclude that in using claims data to determine the content of ambulatory visits, independent validation of such data may be important.
在加拿大不列颠哥伦比亚省,对1215次私人门诊就诊病例的诊断信息进行了评估,以确定索赔单上提供的诊断信息与同时录入病历的诊断信息之间的相似程度。对于每次就诊,由三名独立的内科医生(对数据来源和类型不知情)对索赔卡和病历诊断进行比较,并对每一对诊断做出判断。评判者内部高度一致,且他们的判断随时间推移保持稳定。在40%的病例中,病历和索赔数据被判定为不相似,在38%的病例中,索赔数据被判定作为所治疗主要问题的反映更有价值。病历和索赔数据的判定相似程度与医生工作量、收入以及评判者对计费卡诊断的偏好显著负相关。我们得出结论,在使用索赔数据来确定门诊就诊内容时,对此类数据进行独立验证可能很重要。