Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 176
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once
Background: The use of administrative billing data may enable large-scale assessments of treatment outcomes for Chiari Malformation type I (CM-1). However, to utilize such data sets, validated International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision (ICD-9-CM) code algorithms for identifying CM-1 surgery are needed.
Objective: To validate 2 ICD-9-CM code algorithms identifying patients undergoing CM-1 decompression surgery.
Methods: We retrospectively analyzed the validity of 2 ICD-9-CM code algorithms for identifying adult CM-1 decompression surgery performed at 2 academic medical centers between 2001 and 2013. Algorithm 1 included any discharge diagnosis code of 348.4 (CM-1), as well as a procedure code of 01.24 (cranial decompression) or 03.09 (spinal decompression, or laminectomy). Algorithm 2 restricted this group to patients with a primary diagnosis of 348.4. The positive predictive value (PPV) and sensitivity of each algorithm were calculated.
Results: Among 340 first-time admissions identified by Algorithm 1, the overall PPV for CM-1 decompression was 65%. Among the 214 admissions identified by Algorithm 2, the overall PPV was 99.5%. The PPV for Algorithm 1 was lower in the Vanderbilt (59%) cohort, males (40%), and patients treated between 2009 and 2013 (57%), whereas the PPV of Algorithm 2 remained high (≥99%) across subgroups. The sensitivity of Algorithms 1 (86%) and 2 (83%) were above 75% in all subgroups.
Conclusion: ICD-9-CM code Algorithm 2 has excellent PPV and good sensitivity to identify adult CM-1 decompression surgery. These results lay the foundation for studying CM-1 treatment outcomes by using large administrative databases.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4506217 | PMC |
http://dx.doi.org/10.1227/NEU.0000000000000778 | DOI Listing |
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!