Accuracy of surgical complication rate estimation using ICD‐10 codes.
Published: 18th September 2018
Authors: A. Storesund, A. S. Haugen, M. Hjortås, M. W. Nortvedt, H. Flaatten, G. E. Eide et al.
The ICD‐10 codes are used globally for comparison of diagnoses and complications, and are an important tool for the development of patient safety, healthcare policies and the health economy. The aim of this study was to investigate the accuracy of verified complication rates in surgical admissions identified by ICD‐10 codes and to validate these estimates against complications identified using the established Global Trigger Tool (GTT) methodology.
This was a prospective observational study of a sample of surgical admissions in two Norwegian hospitals. Complications were identified and classified by two expert GTT teams who reviewed patients' medical records. Three trained reviewers verified ICD‐10 codes indicating a complication present on admission or emerging in hospital.
A total of 700 admissions were drawn randomly from 12 966 procedures. Some 519 possible complications were identified in 332 of 700 admissions (47·4 per cent) from ICD‐10 codes. Verification of the ICD‐10 codes against information from patients' medical records confirmed 298 as in‐hospital complications in 141 of 700 admissions (20·1 per cent). Using GTT methodology, 331 complications were found in 212 of 700 admissions (30·3 per cent). Agreement between the two methods reached 83·3 per cent after verification of ICD‐10 codes. The odds ratio for identifying complications using the GTT increased from 5·85 (95 per cent c.i. 4·06 to 8·44) to 25·38 (15·41 to 41·79) when ICD‐10 complication codes were verified against patients' medical records.
Verified ICD‐10 codes strengthen the accuracy of complication rates. Use of non‐verified complication codes from administrative systems significantly overestimates in‐hospital surgical complication rates.Full text
You may also be interested in
Meta‐analysis of the influence of lifestyle changes for preoperative weight loss on surgical outcomes.
Authors: M. Roman, A. Monaghan, G. F. Serraino, D. Miller, S. Pathak, F. Lai et al.
Notes: Possible but how much is enough?
Multicentre cohort study of antihypertensive and lipid‐lowering therapy cessation after bariatric surgery.
Authors: J. Thereaux, T. Lesuffleur, S. Czernichow, A. Basdevant, S. Msika, D. Nocca et al.
Notes: Better than controls
Authors: M. S. de Vos, J. F. Hamming
Development and validation of a nomogram to predict recurrence and melanoma‐specific mortality in patients with negative sentinel lymph nodes.
Authors: D. Verver, D. van Klaveren, V. Franke, A. C. J. van Akkooi, P. Rutkowski, U. Keilholz et al.
Notes: Could personalize care
Authors: A. M. Warwick, T. Jenks, R. Fisher, R. Garrett‐Cox, F. Lecky, D. Yates et al.
Notes: Better in hospitals with a paediatric surgeon
Experimental study of needle recording electrodes placed on the thyroid cartilage for neuromonitoring during thyroid surgery.
Authors: Y. Zhao, C. Li, D. Zhang, L. Zhou, X. Liu, S. Li et al.
Notes: Quick and stable
Authors: D. J. Harris, S. J. Vine, M. R. Wilson, J. S. McGrath, M.‐E. LeBel, G. Buckingham et al.
Notes: Watching other surgeons helpful
Authors: O. Uleberg, K. Pape, T. Kristiansen, P. R. Romundstad, P. Klepstad
Authors: G. Polychronidis, F. J. Hüttner, P. Contin, K. Goossen, L. Uhlmann, M. Heidmann et al.
Authors: F. F. A. IJpma, T. M. van Gulik