Dataset Information

Evaluation of the accuracy of diagnostic coding for influenza compared to laboratory results: the availability of test results before hospital discharge facilitates improved coding accuracy.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Assessing the accuracy of diagnostic coding is essential to ensure the validity and reliability of administrative coded data. The aim of the study was to evaluate the accuracy of assigned International Classification of Diseases version 10-Australian Modification (ICD-10-AM) codes for influenza by comparing with patients' results of their polymerase chain reaction (PCR)-based laboratory tests.

Method

A retrospective study was conducted across seven public hospitals in New South Wales, Australia. A total of 16,439 patients who were admitted and tested by either cartridge-based rapid PCR or batched multiplex PCR between January 2016 and December 2017 met the inclusion criteria. We calculated the sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV) of ICD-10-AM coding using laboratory results as a gold standard. Separate analyses were conducted to determine whether the availability of test results at the time of hospital discharge influenced diagnostic coding accuracy.

Results

Laboratory results revealed 2759 positive influenza cases, while ICD-10-AM coding identified 2527 patients. Overall, 13.7% (n = 378) of test positive patients were not assigned an ICD-10-AM code for influenza. A further 5.8% (n = 146) patients with negative test results were incorrectly assigned an ICD-10-AM code for influenza. The sensitivity, specificity, PPV and NPV of ICD-10-AM coding were 93.1%; 98.9%; 94.5% and 98.6% respectively when test results were received before discharge and 32.7%; 99.2%; 87.8% and 89.8% respectively when test results were not available at discharge. The sensitivity of ICD-10-AM coding varied significantly across hospitals. The use of rapid PCR or hospitalisation during the influenza season were associated with greater coding accuracy.

Conclusion

Although ICD-10-AM coding for influenza demonstrated high accuracy when laboratory results were received before discharge, its sensitivity was substantially lower for patients whose test results were not available at discharge. The timely availability of laboratory test results during the episode of care could contribute to improved coding accuracy.

SUBMITTER: Wabe N

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8141245 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundDiagnostic laboratory tests are routinely defined in terms of their sensitivity, specificity, and ease of use. But the actual clinical impact of a diagnostic test also depends on its availability and price. This is especially true in resource-limited settings such as sub-Saharan Africa. We present a first-of-its-kind report of diagnostic test types, availability, and prices in Kampala, Uganda.MethodsTest types (identity) and availability were based on menus and volumes obtained from clinical laboratories in late 2011 in Kampala using a standard questionnaire. As a measure of test availability, we used the Availability Index (AI). AI is the combined daily testing volumes of laboratories offering a given test, divided by the combined daily testing volumes of all laboratories in Kampala. Test prices were based on a sampling of prices collected in person and via telephone surveys in 2015.FindingsTest volumes and menus were obtained for 95% (907/954) of laboratories in Kampala city. These 907 laboratories offered 100 different test types. The ten most commonly offered tests in decreasing order were Malaria, HCG, HIV serology, Syphilis, Typhoid, Urinalysis, Brucellosis, Stool Analysis, Glucose, and ABO/Rh. In terms of AI, the 100 tests clustered into three groups: high (12 tests), moderate (33 tests), and minimal (55 tests) availability. 50% and 36% of overall availability was provided through private and public laboratories, respectively. Point-of-care laboratories contributed 35% to the AI of high availability tests, but only 6% to the AI of the other tests. The mean price of the most commonly offered test types was $2.62 (range $1.83-$3.46).InterpretationOne hundred different laboratory test types were in use in Kampala in late 2011. Both public and private laboratories were critical to test availability. The tests offered in point-of-care laboratories tended to be the most available tests. Prices of the most common tests ranged from $1.83-$3.46.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Patients are frequently discharged from the hospital before all test results have been finalized. Thirty to 40% of tests pending at discharge (TPADs) return potentially actionable results that could necessitate change in the patients' management, often unbeknownst to their physicians. Delayed follow-up of TPADs can lead to patient harm. We sought to synthesize the existing literature on interventions intended to improve the management of TPADs, including interventions designed to enhance documentation of TPADs, increase physician awareness when TPAD results finalize post-discharge, decrease adverse events related to missed TPADs, and increase physician satisfaction with TPAD management. METHODS:We searched Medline, EMBASE, CINAHL, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Cochrane Database of Controlled Clinical Trials and Medline (January 1, 2000-November 10, 2016) for randomized controlled trials and prospective, controlled observational studies that evaluated interventions to improve follow-up of TPADs for adult patients discharged from acute care hospitals or emergency department settings. From each study we extracted characteristics of the intervention being evaluated and its impact on TPAD management. RESULTS:Nine studies met the criteria for inclusion. Six studies evaluated electronic discharge summary templates with a designated field for documenting TPADs, and three of six of these studies reported a significant improvement in documentation of TPADs in discharge summaries in pre- and post-intervention analysis. One study reported that auditing discharge summaries and providing feedback to physicians were associated with improved TPAD documentation in discharge summaries. Two studies found that email alerts when TPADs were finalized improved physicians' awareness of the results and documentation of their follow-up actions. Of the four studies that assessed patient morbidity, two showed a positive effect; however, none specifically measured the impact of their interventions on downstream patient harm due to delayed follow-up of TPADs. Three studies surveyed physicians' attitudes towards the interventions, of which two studies reported improved physician satisfaction with TPAD management with the implementation of an enhanced discharge template and a notification system when TPADs finalize. DISCUSSION:Discharge summary templates, educational interventions for discharging physicians, and email alerts when TPAD results are finalized show promise in improving management of TPADs. Given the complexity of the processes necessary to ensure follow-up of TPADs, rigorous evaluations of multifaceted interventions (e.g., improved discharge documentation of TPADs combined with email alerts when results become available) is needed.

Project description:BackgroundPatients are increasingly able to access their laboratory test results via patient portals. However, merely providing access does not guarantee comprehension. Patients could experience confusion when reviewing their test results.ObjectiveThe aim of this study is to examine the challenges and needs of patients when comprehending laboratory test results.MethodsWe conducted a web-based survey with 203 participants and a set of semistructured interviews with 13 participants. We assessed patients' perceived challenges and needs (both informational and technological needs) when they attempted to comprehend test results, factors associated with patients' perceptions, and strategies for improving the design of patient portals to communicate laboratory test results more effectively. Descriptive and correlation analysis and thematic analysis were used to analyze the survey and interview data, respectively.ResultsPatients face a variety of challenges and confusion when reviewing laboratory test results. To better comprehend laboratory results, patients need different types of information, which are grouped into 2 categories-generic information (eg, reference range) and personalized or contextual information (eg, treatment options, prognosis, what to do or ask next). We also found that several intrinsic factors (eg, laboratory result normality, health literacy, and technology proficiency) significantly impact people's perceptions of using portals to view and interpret laboratory results. The desired enhancements of patient portals include providing timely explanations and educational resources (eg, a health encyclopedia), increasing usability and accessibility, and incorporating artificial intelligence-based technology to provide personalized recommendations.ConclusionsPatients face significant challenges in interpreting the meaning of laboratory test results. Designers and developers of patient portals should employ user-centered approaches to improve the design of patient portals to present information in a more meaningful way.