Development and validation of case-finding algorithms to identify prosthetic joint infections after total knee arthroplasty in Veterans Health Administration data

利用退伍军人健康管理局数据,开发和验证用于识别全膝关节置换术后假体关节感染的病例发现算法

阅读:1

Abstract

PURPOSE: To determine the positive predictive values (PPVs) of ICD-9, ICD-10, and current procedural terminology (CPT)-based diagnostic coding algorithms to identify prosthetic joint infection (PJI) following knee arthroplasty (TKA) within the United States Veterans Health Administration. METHODS: We identified patients with: (1) hospital discharge ICD-9 or ICD-10 diagnosis of PJI, (2) ICD-9, ICD-10, or CPT procedure code for TKA prior to PJI diagnosis, (3) CPT code for knee X-ray within ±90 days of the PJI diagnosis, and (4) at least 1 CPT code for arthrocentesis, arthrotomy, blood culture, or microbiologic procedure within ±90 days of the PJI diagnosis date. Separate samples of patients identified with the ICD-9 and ICD-10-based PJI diagnoses were obtained, stratified by TKA procedure volume at each medical center. Medical records of sampled patients were reviewed by infectious disease clinicians to adjudicate PJI events. The PPV (95% confidence interval [CI]) for the ICD-9 and ICD-10 PJI algorithms were calculated. RESULTS: Among a sample of 80 patients meeting the ICD-9 PJI algorithm, 60 (PPV 75.0%, [CI 64.1%-84.0%]) had confirmed PJI. Among 80 patients who met the ICD-10 PJI algorithm, 68 (PPV 85.0%, [CI 75.3%-92.0%]) had a confirmed diagnosis. CONCLUSIONS: An algorithm consisting of an ICD-9 or ICD-10 PJI diagnosis following a TKA code combined with CPT codes for a knee X-ray and either a relevant surgical procedure or microbiologic culture yielded a PPV of 75.0% (ICD-9) and 85.0% (ICD-10), for confirmed PJI events and could be considered for use in future pharmacoepidemiologic studies.

特别声明

1、本页面内容包含部分的内容是基于公开信息的合理引用;引用内容仅为补充信息,不代表本站立场。

2、若认为本页面引用内容涉及侵权,请及时与本站联系,我们将第一时间处理。

3、其他媒体/个人如需使用本页面原创内容,需注明“来源:[生知库]”并获得授权;使用引用内容的,需自行联系原作者获得许可。

4、投稿及合作请联系:info@biocloudy.com。