Validity of Administrative Coding in Identifying Patients With Upper Urinary Tract Calculi

Michelle J. Semins, Bruce Trock, Brian Matlaga

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Purpose: Administrative databases are increasingly used for epidemiological investigations. We performed a study to assess the validity of ICD-9 codes for upper urinary tract stone disease in an administrative database. Materials and Methods: We retrieved the records of all inpatients and outpatients at Johns Hopkins Hospital between November 2007 and October 2008 with an ICD-9 code of 592, 592.0, 592.1 or 592.9 as one of the first 3 diagnosis codes. A random number generator selected 100 encounters for further review. We considered a patient to have a true diagnosis of an upper tract stone if the medical records specifically referenced a kidney stone event, or included current or past treatment for a kidney stone. Descriptive and comparative analyses were performed. Results: A total of 8,245 encounters coded as upper tract calculus were identified and 100 were randomly selected for review. Two patients could not be identified within the electronic medical record and were excluded from the study. The positive predictive value of using all ICD-9 codes for an upper tract calculus (592, 592.0, 592.1) to identify subjects with renal or ureteral stones was 95.9%. For 592.0 only the positive predictive value was 85%. However, although the positive predictive value for 592.1 only was 100%, 26 subjects (76%) with a ureteral stone were not appropriately billed with this code. Conclusions: ICD-9 coding for urinary calculi is likely to be sufficiently valid to be useful in studies using administrative data to analyze stone disease. However, ICD-9 coding is not a reliable means to distinguish between subjects with renal and ureteral calculi.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)190-192
Number of pages3
JournalJournal of Urology
Volume184
Issue number1
DOIs
StatePublished - Jul 2010

Fingerprint

Urinary Calculi
International Classification of Diseases
Urinary Tract
Kidney Calculi
Calculi
Databases
Ureteral Calculi
Urologic Diseases
Electronic Health Records
Medical Records
Inpatients
Outpatients
Kidney

Keywords

  • calculi
  • epidemiology
  • kidney

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Urology

Cite this

Validity of Administrative Coding in Identifying Patients With Upper Urinary Tract Calculi. / Semins, Michelle J.; Trock, Bruce; Matlaga, Brian.

In: Journal of Urology, Vol. 184, No. 1, 07.2010, p. 190-192.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{494b014b08414f2cb5d426ec8a66ea66,
title = "Validity of Administrative Coding in Identifying Patients With Upper Urinary Tract Calculi",
abstract = "Purpose: Administrative databases are increasingly used for epidemiological investigations. We performed a study to assess the validity of ICD-9 codes for upper urinary tract stone disease in an administrative database. Materials and Methods: We retrieved the records of all inpatients and outpatients at Johns Hopkins Hospital between November 2007 and October 2008 with an ICD-9 code of 592, 592.0, 592.1 or 592.9 as one of the first 3 diagnosis codes. A random number generator selected 100 encounters for further review. We considered a patient to have a true diagnosis of an upper tract stone if the medical records specifically referenced a kidney stone event, or included current or past treatment for a kidney stone. Descriptive and comparative analyses were performed. Results: A total of 8,245 encounters coded as upper tract calculus were identified and 100 were randomly selected for review. Two patients could not be identified within the electronic medical record and were excluded from the study. The positive predictive value of using all ICD-9 codes for an upper tract calculus (592, 592.0, 592.1) to identify subjects with renal or ureteral stones was 95.9{\%}. For 592.0 only the positive predictive value was 85{\%}. However, although the positive predictive value for 592.1 only was 100{\%}, 26 subjects (76{\%}) with a ureteral stone were not appropriately billed with this code. Conclusions: ICD-9 coding for urinary calculi is likely to be sufficiently valid to be useful in studies using administrative data to analyze stone disease. However, ICD-9 coding is not a reliable means to distinguish between subjects with renal and ureteral calculi.",
keywords = "calculi, epidemiology, kidney",
author = "Semins, {Michelle J.} and Bruce Trock and Brian Matlaga",
year = "2010",
month = "7",
doi = "10.1016/j.juro.2010.03.011",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "184",
pages = "190--192",
journal = "Journal of Urology",
issn = "0022-5347",
publisher = "Elsevier Inc.",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Validity of Administrative Coding in Identifying Patients With Upper Urinary Tract Calculi

AU - Semins, Michelle J.

AU - Trock, Bruce

AU - Matlaga, Brian

PY - 2010/7

Y1 - 2010/7

N2 - Purpose: Administrative databases are increasingly used for epidemiological investigations. We performed a study to assess the validity of ICD-9 codes for upper urinary tract stone disease in an administrative database. Materials and Methods: We retrieved the records of all inpatients and outpatients at Johns Hopkins Hospital between November 2007 and October 2008 with an ICD-9 code of 592, 592.0, 592.1 or 592.9 as one of the first 3 diagnosis codes. A random number generator selected 100 encounters for further review. We considered a patient to have a true diagnosis of an upper tract stone if the medical records specifically referenced a kidney stone event, or included current or past treatment for a kidney stone. Descriptive and comparative analyses were performed. Results: A total of 8,245 encounters coded as upper tract calculus were identified and 100 were randomly selected for review. Two patients could not be identified within the electronic medical record and were excluded from the study. The positive predictive value of using all ICD-9 codes for an upper tract calculus (592, 592.0, 592.1) to identify subjects with renal or ureteral stones was 95.9%. For 592.0 only the positive predictive value was 85%. However, although the positive predictive value for 592.1 only was 100%, 26 subjects (76%) with a ureteral stone were not appropriately billed with this code. Conclusions: ICD-9 coding for urinary calculi is likely to be sufficiently valid to be useful in studies using administrative data to analyze stone disease. However, ICD-9 coding is not a reliable means to distinguish between subjects with renal and ureteral calculi.

AB - Purpose: Administrative databases are increasingly used for epidemiological investigations. We performed a study to assess the validity of ICD-9 codes for upper urinary tract stone disease in an administrative database. Materials and Methods: We retrieved the records of all inpatients and outpatients at Johns Hopkins Hospital between November 2007 and October 2008 with an ICD-9 code of 592, 592.0, 592.1 or 592.9 as one of the first 3 diagnosis codes. A random number generator selected 100 encounters for further review. We considered a patient to have a true diagnosis of an upper tract stone if the medical records specifically referenced a kidney stone event, or included current or past treatment for a kidney stone. Descriptive and comparative analyses were performed. Results: A total of 8,245 encounters coded as upper tract calculus were identified and 100 were randomly selected for review. Two patients could not be identified within the electronic medical record and were excluded from the study. The positive predictive value of using all ICD-9 codes for an upper tract calculus (592, 592.0, 592.1) to identify subjects with renal or ureteral stones was 95.9%. For 592.0 only the positive predictive value was 85%. However, although the positive predictive value for 592.1 only was 100%, 26 subjects (76%) with a ureteral stone were not appropriately billed with this code. Conclusions: ICD-9 coding for urinary calculi is likely to be sufficiently valid to be useful in studies using administrative data to analyze stone disease. However, ICD-9 coding is not a reliable means to distinguish between subjects with renal and ureteral calculi.

KW - calculi

KW - epidemiology

KW - kidney

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=77953123334&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=77953123334&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.juro.2010.03.011

DO - 10.1016/j.juro.2010.03.011

M3 - Article

C2 - 20478584

AN - SCOPUS:77953123334

VL - 184

SP - 190

EP - 192

JO - Journal of Urology

JF - Journal of Urology

SN - 0022-5347

IS - 1

ER -