Dataset Information

Developing Electronic Health Record Algorithms That Accurately Identify Patients With Systemic Lupus Erythematosus.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

To study systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) in the electronic health record (EHR), we must accurately identify patients with SLE. Our objective was to develop and validate novel EHR algorithms that use International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision (ICD-9), Clinical Modification codes, laboratory testing, and medications to identify SLE patients.

Methods

We used Vanderbilt's Synthetic Derivative, a de-identified version of the EHR, with 2.5 million subjects. We selected all individuals with at least 1 SLE ICD-9 code (710.0), yielding 5,959 individuals. To create a training set, 200 subjects were randomly selected for chart review. A subject was defined as a case if diagnosed with SLE by a rheumatologist, nephrologist, or dermatologist. Positive predictive values (PPVs) and sensitivity were calculated for combinations of code counts of the SLE ICD-9 code, a positive antinuclear antibody (ANA), ever use of medications, and a keyword of "lupus" in the problem list. The algorithms with the highest PPV were each internally validated using a random set of 100 individuals from the remaining 5,759 subjects.

Results

The algorithm with the highest PPV at 95% in the training set and 91% in the validation set was 3 or more counts of the SLE ICD-9 code, ANA positive (?1:40), and ever use of both disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs and steroids, while excluding individuals with systemic sclerosis and dermatomyositis ICD-9 codes.

Conclusion

We developed and validated the first EHR algorithm that incorporates laboratory values and medications with the SLE ICD-9 code to identify patients with SLE accurately.

SUBMITTER: Barnado A

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5219863 | biostudies-literature | 2017 May

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Developing Electronic Health Record Algorithms That Accurately Identify Patients With Systemic Lupus Erythematosus.

Barnado April A Casey Carolyn C Carroll Robert J RJ Wheless Lee L Denny Joshua C JC Crofford Leslie J LJ

Arthritis care & research 20170410 5

<h4>Objective</h4>To study systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) in the electronic health record (EHR), we must accurately identify patients with SLE. Our objective was to develop and validate novel EHR algorithms that use International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision (ICD-9), Clinical Modification codes, laboratory testing, and medications to identify SLE patients.<h4>Methods</h4>We used Vanderbilt's Synthetic Derivative, a de-identified version of the EHR, with 2.5 million subjects. We ...[more]

PMID: 27390187

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:Systemic sclerosis (SSc) is a rare disease with studies limited by small sample sizes. Electronic health records (EHRs) represent a powerful tool to study patients with rare diseases such as SSc, but validated methods are needed. We developed and validated EHR-based algorithms that incorporate billing codes and clinical data to identify SSc patients in the EHR. METHODS:We used a de-identified EHR with over 3 million subjects and identified 1899 potential SSc subjects with at least 1 count of the SSc ICD-9 (710.1) or ICD-10-CM (M34*) codes. We randomly selected 200 as a training set for chart review. A subject was a case if diagnosed with SSc by a rheumatologist, dermatologist, or pulmonologist. We selected the following algorithm components based on clinical knowledge and available data: SSc ICD-9 and ICD-10-CM codes, positive antinuclear antibody (ANA) (titer ≥ 1:80), and a keyword of Raynaud's phenomenon (RP). We performed both rule-based and machine learning techniques for algorithm development. Positive predictive values (PPVs), sensitivities, and F-scores (which account for PPVs and sensitivities) were calculated for the algorithms. RESULTS:PPVs were low for algorithms using only 1 count of the SSc ICD-9 code. As code counts increased, the PPVs increased. PPVs were higher for algorithms using ICD-10-CM codes versus the ICD-9 code. Adding a positive ANA and RP keyword increased the PPVs of algorithms only using ICD billing codes. Algorithms using ≥ 3 or ≥ 4 counts of the SSc ICD-9 or ICD-10-CM codes and ANA positivity had the highest PPV at 100% but a low sensitivity at 50%. The algorithm with the highest F-score of 91% was ≥ 4 counts of the ICD-9 or ICD-10-CM codes with an internally validated PPV of 90%. A machine learning method using random forests yielded an algorithm with a PPV of 84%, sensitivity of 92%, and F-score of 88%. The most important feature was RP keyword. CONCLUSIONS:Algorithms using only ICD-9 codes did not perform well to identify SSc patients. The highest performing algorithms incorporated clinical data with billing codes. EHR-based algorithms can identify SSc patients across a healthcare system, enabling researchers to examine important outcomes.

Project description:Objective No guidelines exist for Pneumocystis jirovecii pneumonia (PJP) prophylaxis in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE). Limited data are available on incidence of PJP infection and use of PJP prophylaxis. Using a real-world, electronic health record (EHR) cohort, we investigated the frequency of PJP infections as well as patient and provider factors that impacted use and type of PJP prophylaxis. Methods In a large, de-identified EHR, we identified possible SLE patients using a previously validated algorithm. PJP ICD-9 or ICD-10-CM billing codes and PJP keywords were used to identify possible PJP cases within this SLE cohort. We assessed for PJP prophylaxis prescribing in all SLE patients using keywords and reviewing medication lists for prophylactic agents. Chart review was used to confirm cases of SLE, PJP, and PJP prophylaxis and to obtain data on demographics, comorbidities, and immunosuppressants. Results Of 977 SLE patients, there were only four with confirmed PJP infection. Two of these patients had concurrent Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome, and none were on prophylaxis. Of 977 SLE patients, 132 (14%) were prescribed PJP prophylaxis. Of 617 SLE patients ever prescribed immunosuppressants, 128 (21%) were prescribed PJP prophylaxis. Sulfonamides were the most common prophylaxis prescribed (69%), and possible adverse events were documented in 22 out of 117 instances of being placed on a sulfonamide. Patients of younger age, Black race, nephritis, and renal transplant, and on chronic glucocorticoids were all more likely to have PJP prophylaxis prescribed. Patients who were on transplant induction medications, calcineurin/mTOR inhibitors, cyclophosphamide, and mycophenolate mofetil all were more likely to be prescribed PJP prophylaxis compared to other immunosuppressants. Conclusion PJP is a rare diagnosis among SLE patients, and prior studies may even overestimate its prevalence. PJP prophylaxis was less common in our cohort than previously described. Adverse events related to sulfonamides used for PJP prophylaxis were relatively rare with lower rates than previously reported. Our study demonstrates real-world PJP prophylaxis prescribing patterns in a large cohort of SLE patients.

Dataset Information

Developing Electronic Health Record Algorithms That Accurately Identify Patients With Systemic Lupus Erythematosus.

Objective

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Publications

Developing Electronic Health Record Algorithms That Accurately Identify Patients With Systemic Lupus Erythematosus.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets