Construction of a semi-automatic ICD-10 coding system.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Background
The International Classification of Diseases, 10th Revision (ICD-10) has been widely used to describe the diagnosis information of patients. Automatic ICD-10 coding is important because manually assigning codes is expensive, time consuming and error prone. Although numerous approaches have been developed to explore automatic coding, few of them have been applied in practice. Our aim is to construct a practical, automatic ICD-10 coding machine to improve coding efficiency and quality in daily work.Methods
In this study, we propose the use of regular expressions (regexps) to establish a correspondence between diagnosis codes and diagnosis descriptions in outpatient settings and at admission and discharge. The description models of the regexps were embedded in our upgraded coding system, which queries a diagnosis description and assigns a unique diagnosis code. Like most studies, the precision (P), recall (R), F-measure (F) and overall accuracy (A) were used to evaluate the system performance. Our study had two stages. The datasets were obtained from the diagnosis information on the homepage of the discharge medical record. The testing sets were from October 1, 2017 to April 30, 2018 and from July 1, 2018 to January 31, 2019.Results
The values of P were 89.27 and 88.38% in the first testing phase and the second testing phase, respectively, which demonstrate high precision. The automatic ICD-10 coding system completed more than 160,000 codes in 16 months, which reduced the workload of the coders. In addition, a comparison between the amount of time needed for manual coding and automatic coding indicated the effectiveness of the system-the time needed for automatic coding takes nearly 100 times less than manual coding.Conclusions
Our automatic coding system is well suited for the coding task. Further studies are warranted to perfect the description models of the regexps and to develop synthetic approaches to improve system performance.
SUBMITTER: Zhou L
PROVIDER: S-EPMC7157985 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:ICD-10(International Classification of Diseases 10th revision) is a classification of a disease, symptom, procedure, or injury. Diseases are often described in patients' medical records with free texts, such as terms, phrases and paraphrases, which differ significantly from those used in ICD-10 classification. This paper presents an improved approach based on the Longest Common Subsequence (LCS) and semantic similarity for automatic Chinese diagnoses, mapping from the disease names given by clinician to the disease names in ICD-10. LCS refers to the longest string that is a subsequence of every member of a given set of strings. The proposed method of improved LCS in this paper can increase the accuracy of processing in Chinese disease mapping.
| S-EPMC5356997 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundWhile potentially timesaving, there is no program to automatically transform diagnosis codes of the ICD-10 German modification (ICD-10-GM) into the injury severity score (ISS).ObjectiveTo develop a mapping method from ICD-10-GM into ICD-10 clinical modification (ICD-10-CM) to calculate the abbreviated injury scale (AIS) and ISS of each patient using the ICDPIC-R and to compare the manually and automatically calculated scores.MethodsBetween January 2019 and June 2021, the most severe AIS of each body region and the ISS were manually calculated using medical documentation and radiology reports of all major trauma patients of a German level I trauma centre. The ICD-10-GM codes of these patients were exported from the electronic medical data system SAP, and a Java program was written to transform these into ICD-10-CM codes. Afterwards, the ICDPIC-R was used to automatically generate the most severe AIS of each body region and the ISS. The automatically and manually determined ISS and AIS scores were then tested for equivalence.ResultsStatistical analysis revealed that the manually and automatically calculated ISS were significantly equivalent over the entire patient cohort. Further sub-group analysis, however, showed that equivalence could only be demonstrated for patients with an ISS between 16 and 24. Likewise, the highest AIS scores of each body region were not equal in the manually and automatically calculated group.ConclusionThough achieving mapping results highly comparable to previous mapping methods of ICD-10-CM diagnosis codes, it is not unrestrictedly possible to automatically calculate the AIS and ISS using ICD-10-GM codes.
| S-EPMC8432850 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveWe describe the most frequently used musculoskeletal diagnoses in Veterans Health Administration care. We report the number of visits and patients associated with common musculoskeletal International Classification of Diseases (ICD)-10 codes and compare trends across primary and specialty care settings.DesignSecondary analysis of a longitudinal cohort study.SubjectsVeterans included in the Musculoskeletal Diagnosis Cohort with a musculoskeletal diagnosis from October 1, 2015, through September 30, 2017.MethodsWe obtained counts and proportions of all musculoskeletal diagnosis codes used and the number of unique patients with each musculoskeletal diagnosis. Diagnosis use was compared between primary and specialty care settings.ResultsOf more than 6,400 possible ICD-10 M-codes describing "Diseases of the Musculoskeletal System and Connective Tissue," 5,723 codes were used at least once. The most frequently used ICD-10 M-code was "Low Back Pain" (18.3%), followed by "Cervicalgia" (3.6%). Collectively, the 100 most frequently used codes accounted for 80% of M-coded visit diagnoses, and 95% of patients had at least one of these diagnoses. The most common diagnoses (spinal pain, joint pain, osteoarthritis) were used similarly in primary and specialty care settings.ConclusionA diverse sample of all available musculoskeletal diagnosis codes were used; however, less than 2% of all possible codes accounted for 80% of the diagnoses used. This trend was consistent across primary and specialty care settings. The most frequently used diagnosis codes describe the types of musculoskeletal conditions, among a large pool of potential diagnoses, that prompt veterans to present to the Veterans Health Administration for musculoskeletal care.
| S-EPMC8783617 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveThe study sought to assess the feasibility of replacing the International Classification of Diseases-Tenth Revision-Clinical Modification (ICD-10-CM) with the International Classification of Diseases-11th Revision (ICD-11) for morbidity coding based on content analysis.Materials and methodsThe most frequently used ICD-10-CM codes from each chapter covering 60% of patients were identified from Medicare claims and hospital data. Each ICD-10-CM code was recoded in the ICD-11, using postcoordination (combination of codes) if necessary. Recoding was performed by 2 terminologists independently. Failure analysis was done for cases where full representation was not achieved even with postcoordination. After recoding, the coding guidance (inclusions, exclusions, and index) of the ICD-10-CM and ICD-11 codes were reviewed for conflict.ResultsOverall, 23.5% of 943 codes could be fully represented by the ICD-11 without postcoordination. Postcoordination is the potential game changer. It supports the full representation of 8.6% of 943 codes. Moreover, with the addition of only 9 extension codes, postcoordination supports the full representation of 35.2% of 943 codes. Coding guidance review identified potential conflicts in 10% of codes, but mostly not affecting recoding. The majority of the conflicts resulted from differences in granularity and default coding assumptions between the ICD-11 and ICD-10-CM.ConclusionsWith some minor enhancements to postcoordination, the ICD-11 can fully represent almost 60% of the most frequently used ICD-10-CM codes. Even without postcoordination, 23.5% full representation is comparable to the 24.3% of ICD-9-CM codes with exact match in the ICD-10-CM, so migrating from the ICD-10-CM to the ICD-11 is not necessarily more disruptive than from the International Classification of Diseases-Ninth Revision-Clinical Modification to the ICD-10-CM. Therefore, the ICD-11 (without a CM) should be considered as a candidate to replace the ICD-10-CM for morbidity coding.
| S-EPMC8510319 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundNaming a newly discovered disease is a difficult process; in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic and the existence of post-acute sequelae of SARS-CoV-2 infection (PASC), which includes Long COVID, it has proven especially challenging. Disease definitions and assignment of a diagnosis code are often asynchronous and iterative. The clinical definition and our understanding of the underlying mechanisms of Long COVID are still in flux, and the deployment of an ICD-10-CM code for Long COVID in the US took nearly two years after patients had begun to describe their condition. Here we leverage the largest publicly available HIPAA-limited dataset about patients with COVID-19 in the US to examine the heterogeneity of adoption and use of U09.9, the ICD-10-CM code for "Post COVID-19 condition, unspecified."MethodsWe undertook a number of analyses to characterize the N3C population with a U09.9 diagnosis code ( n = 21,072), including assessing person-level demographics and a number of area-level social determinants of health; diagnoses commonly co-occurring with U09.9, clustered using the Louvain algorithm; and quantifying medications and procedures recorded within 60 days of U09.9 diagnosis. We stratified all analyses by age group in order to discern differing patterns of care across the lifespan.ResultsWe established the diagnoses most commonly co-occurring with U09.9, and algorithmically clustered them into four major categories: cardiopulmonary, neurological, gastrointestinal, and comorbid conditions. Importantly, we discovered that the population of patients diagnosed with U09.9 is demographically skewed toward female, White, non-Hispanic individuals, as well as individuals living in areas with low poverty, high education, and high access to medical care. Our results also include a characterization of common procedures and medications associated with U09.9-coded patients.ConclusionsThis work offers insight into potential subtypes and current practice patterns around Long COVID, and speaks to the existence of disparities in the diagnosis of patients with Long COVID. This latter finding in particular requires further research and urgent remediation.
| S-EPMC9460974 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundWe aimed to estimate the impact of the International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision, Clinical Modification (ICD-10-CM) coding transition on traumatic injury-related hospitalization trends among young adults across a geographically and demographically diverse group of U.S. states.MethodsInterrupted time series analyses were conducted using statewide inpatient databases from 12 states and including traumatic injury-related hospitalizations in adults aged 19-44?years in 2011-2017. Segmented regression models were used to estimate the impact of the October 2015 coding transition on external cause of injury (ECOI) completeness (percentage of hospitalizations with a documented ECOI code) and on population-level rates of injury-related hospitalizations by nature, intent, mechanism, and severity of injury.ResultsThe transition to ICD-10-CM was associated with a drop in ECOI completion in the transition month (-?3.7%; P?<?.0001), but there was no significant change in the positive trend in ECOI completion from the pre- to post-transition periods. There were significant increases post-transition in the measured rates of hospitalization for traumatic brain injury (TBI), unintentional injury, mild injury (injury severity score (ISS) <?9), and injuries caused by drowning, firearms, machinery, other pedestrian, suffocation, and unspecified mechanism. Conversely, there were significant decreases in October 2015 in the rates of hospitalization for assault, injuries of undetermined intent, injuries of moderate severity (ISS 9-15), and injuries caused by fire/burn, other pedal cyclist, other transportation, natural/environmental, and other specified mechanism. A significant increase in the percentage of hospitalizations classified as resulting from severe injury (ISS?>?15) was observed when the general equivalence mapping maximum severity method for converting ICD-10-CM codes to ICD-9-CM codes was used. State-specific results for the outcomes of ECOI completion and TBI-related hospitalization rates are provided in an online supplement.ConclusionsThe U.S. transition from ICD-9-CM to ICD-10-CM coding led to a significant decrease in ECOI completion and several significant changes in measured rates of injury-related hospitalizations by injury intent, mechanism, nature, and severity. The results of this study can inform the design and analysis of future traumatic injury-related health services research studies that use both ICD-9-CM and ICD-10-CM coded data.Level of evidenceII (Interrupted Time Series).
| S-EPMC7830822 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe International Classification of Diseases (ICD) and the International Classification of Diseases for Oncology (ICD-O) are both widely used global classification systems. In 2018, the initial release of the ICD-11 was published by the World Health Organization (WHO), integrating the morphology section of the ICD-O.MethodsThis paper aims to provide potential ICD-11 users with a profound understanding of the neoplasm classifications of the ICD-11 by analysing the differences and relationships between the ICD-11 and ICD-O in terms of the coding framework, compatibility and intelligence level.ResultsThe ICD-11 and ICD-O have remarkable differences in coding structure. Compared to the ICD-O, the ICD-11 has the following advantages: adding histopathology to the stem codes, obtaining a meaningful minimum amount of information through stem codes for statistics, supporting the usage of ICD-O morphology categories and capturing clinical details via extension codes for multiaxial coding. In addition, the rich Foundation Component, linearization derived from the Foundation Component and updating mechanism all support the compatibility of the ICD-11 with other classification systems. Notably, the WHO provides terminology coding with a smart coding tool, and coding in the ICD-11 can draw on statistical codes and uniform resource identifiers (URIs) simultaneously.ConclusionsThe ICD-11 represents a novel classification system with distinguishing features that include facilitating statistics, multiaxial coding, coding granularity, compatibility and intelligence. These features enable the ICD-11 to be more powerful for neoplasm coding than the ICD-O and basically meet the needs of stakeholders.
| S-EPMC9758819 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesUnderstand the continuity and changes in headache not-otherwise-specified (NOS), migraine, and post-traumatic headache (PTH) diagnoses after the transition from ICD-9-CM to ICD-10-CM in the Veterans Health Administration (VHA).BackgroundHeadache is one of the most commonly diagnosed chronic conditions managed within primary and specialty care clinics. The VHA transitioned from ICD-9-CM to ICD-10-CM on October-1-2015. The effect transitioning on coding of specific headache diagnoses is unknown. Accuracy of headache diagnosis is important since different headache types respond to different treatments.MethodsWe mapped headache diagnoses from ICD-9-CM (FY 2014/2015) onto ICD-10-CM (FY 2016/2017) and computed coding proportions two years before/after the transition in VHA. We used queries to determine the change in transition pathways. We report the odds of ICD-10-CM coding associated with ICD-9-CM controlling for provider type, and patient age, sex, and race/ethnicity.ResultsOnly 37%, 58% and 34% of patients with ICD-9-CM coding of NOS, migraine, and PTH respectively had an ICD-10-CM headache diagnosis. Of those with an ICD-10-CM diagnosis, 73-79% had a single headache diagnosis. The odds ratios for receiving the same code in both ICD-9-CM and ICD-10-CM after adjustment for ICD-9-CM and ICD-10-CM headache comorbidities and sociodemographic factors were high (range 6-26) and statistically significant. Specifically, 75% of patients with headache NOS had received one headache diagnoses (Adjusted headache NOS-ICD-9-CM OR for headache NOS-ICD-10-CM = 6.1, 95% CI 5.89-6.32. 79% of migraineurs had one headache diagnoses, mostly migraine (Adjusted migraine-ICD-9-CM OR for migraine-ICD-10-CM = 26.43, 95% CI 25.51-27.38). The same held true for PTH (Adjusted PTH-ICD-9-CM OR for PTH-ICD-10-CM = 22.92, 95% CI: 18.97-27.68). These strong associations remained after adjustment for specialist care in ICD-10-CM follow-up period.DiscussionThe majority of people with ICD-9-CM headache diagnoses did not have an ICD-10-CM headache diagnosis. However, a given diagnosis in ICD-9-CM by a primary care provider (PCP) was significantly predictive of its assignment in ICD-10-CM as was seeing either a neurologist or physiatrist (compared to a generalist) for an ICD-10-CM headache diagnosis.ConclusionWhen a veteran had a specific diagnosis in ICD-9-CM, the odds of being coded with the same diagnosis in ICD-10-CM were significantly higher. Specialist visit during the ICD-10-CM period was independently associated with all three ICD-10-CM headaches.
| S-EPMC9812322 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundImplementation of the International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision, Clinical Modification (ICD-10-CM) in the U.S. on October 1, 2015 was a significant policy change with the potential to affect established injury morbidity trends. This study used data from a single state to demonstrate 1) the use of a statistical method to estimate the effect of this coding transition on injury hospitalization trends, and 2) interpretation of significant changes in injury trends in the context of the structural and conceptual differences between ICD-9-CM and ICD-10-CM, the new ICD-10-CM-specific coding guidelines, and proposed ICD-10-CM-based framework for reporting of injuries by intent and mechanism. Segmented regression analysis was used for statistical modeling of interrupted time series monthly data to evaluate the effect of the transition to ICD-10-CM on Kentucky hospitalizations' external-cause-of-injury completeness (percentage of records with principal injury diagnoses supplemented with external-cause-of-injury codes), as well as injury hospitalization trends by intent or mechanism, January 2012-December 2017.ResultsThe segmented regression analysis showed an immediate significant drop in external-cause-of-injury completeness during the transition month, but returned to its pre-transition levels in November 2015. There was a significant immediate change in the percentage of injury hospitalizations coded for unintentional (3.34%) and undetermined intent (- 3.39%). There were immediate significant changes in the level of injury hospitalization rates due to poisoning, suffocation, struck by/against, other transportation, unspecified mechanism, and other specified not elsewhere classifiable mechanism. Significant change in slope after the transition (without immediate level change) was identified for assault, firearm, cut/pierce, and motor vehicle traffic injury rates. The observed trend changes reflected structural and conceptual features of ICD-10-CM coding (e.g., poisoning and suffocations are now captured via diagnosis codes only), new coding guidelines (e.g., requiring coding of injury intent as "accidental" if it is unknown or unspecified), and CDC proposed external-cause-of-injury code groupings by injury intent and mechanism. Researchers can replicate this methodology assessing trends in injuries or other ICD-10-CM-coded conditions using administrative billing data sets.ConclusionsThe CDC 's Proposed Framework for Presenting Injury Data Using ICD-10-CM External Cause of Injury Codes provided a logical transition from the ICD-9-CM-based matrix on injury hospitalization trends by intent and mechanism. Our findings are intended to raise awareness that changes in the ICD-10-CM coding system must be understood to assure accurate interpretation of injury trends.
| S-EPMC6165830 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:The phecode system was built upon the International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification (ICD-9-CM) for phenome-wide association studies (PheWAS) using the electronic health record (EHR). OBJECTIVE:The goal of this paper was to develop and perform an initial evaluation of maps from the International Classification of Diseases, 10th Revision (ICD-10) and the International Classification of Diseases, 10th Revision, Clinical Modification (ICD-10-CM) codes to phecodes. METHODS:We mapped ICD-10 and ICD-10-CM codes to phecodes using a number of methods and resources, such as concept relationships and explicit mappings from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, the Unified Medical Language System, Observational Health Data Sciences and Informatics, Systematized Nomenclature of Medicine-Clinical Terms, and the National Library of Medicine. We assessed the coverage of the maps in two databases: Vanderbilt University Medical Center (VUMC) using ICD-10-CM and the UK Biobank (UKBB) using ICD-10. We assessed the fidelity of the ICD-10-CM map in comparison to the gold-standard ICD-9-CM phecode map by investigating phenotype reproducibility and conducting a PheWAS. RESULTS:We mapped >75% of ICD-10 and ICD-10-CM codes to phecodes. Of the unique codes observed in the UKBB (ICD-10) and VUMC (ICD-10-CM) cohorts, >90% were mapped to phecodes. We observed 70-75% reproducibility for chronic diseases and <10% for an acute disease for phenotypes sourced from the ICD-10-CM phecode map. Using the ICD-9-CM and ICD-10-CM maps, we conducted a PheWAS with a Lipoprotein(a) genetic variant, rs10455872, which replicated two known genotype-phenotype associations with similar effect sizes: coronary atherosclerosis (ICD-9-CM: P<.001; odds ratio (OR) 1.60 [95% CI 1.43-1.80] vs ICD-10-CM: P<.001; OR 1.60 [95% CI 1.43-1.80]) and chronic ischemic heart disease (ICD-9-CM: P<.001; OR 1.56 [95% CI 1.35-1.79] vs ICD-10-CM: P<.001; OR 1.47 [95% CI 1.22-1.77]). CONCLUSIONS:This study introduces the beta versions of ICD-10 and ICD-10-CM to phecode maps that enable researchers to leverage accumulated ICD-10 and ICD-10-CM data for PheWAS in the EHR.
| S-EPMC6911227 | biostudies-literature