Comparison of Medicare claims-based Clostridioides difficile infection epidemiologic case classification algorithms to medical record review by the Emerging Infections Program using a linked cohort, 2016-2021.

IF 3 4区 医学 Q2 INFECTIOUS DISEASES
Dustin W Currie, Chantal Lewis, Joseph D Lutgring, Sophia V Kazakova, James Baggs, Lauren Korhonen, Maria Correa, Dana Goodenough, Danyel M Olson, Jill Szydlowski, Ghinwa Dumyati, Scott K Fridkin, Christopher Wilson, Alice Y Guh, Sujan C Reddy, Kelly M Hatfield
{"title":"Comparison of Medicare claims-based <i>Clostridioides difficile</i> infection epidemiologic case classification algorithms to medical record review by the Emerging Infections Program using a linked cohort, 2016-2021.","authors":"Dustin W Currie, Chantal Lewis, Joseph D Lutgring, Sophia V Kazakova, James Baggs, Lauren Korhonen, Maria Correa, Dana Goodenough, Danyel M Olson, Jill Szydlowski, Ghinwa Dumyati, Scott K Fridkin, Christopher Wilson, Alice Y Guh, Sujan C Reddy, Kelly M Hatfield","doi":"10.1017/ice.2024.204","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Medicare claims are frequently used to study <i>Clostridioides difficile</i> infection (CDI) epidemiology. However, they lack specimen collection and diagnosis dates to assign location of onset. Algorithms to classify CDI onset location using claims data have been published, but the degree of misclassification is unknown.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We linked patients with laboratory-confirmed CDI reported to four Emerging Infections Program (EIP) sites from 2016-2021 to Medicare beneficiaries with fee-for-service Part A/B coverage. We calculated sensitivity of ICD-10-CM codes in claims within ±28 days of EIP specimen collection. CDI was categorized as hospital, long-term care facility, or community-onset using three different Medicare claims-based algorithms based on claim type, ICD-10-CM code position, duration of hospitalization, and ICD-10-CM diagnosis code presence-on-admission indicators. We assessed concordance of EIP case classifications, based on chart review and specimen collection date, with claims case classifications using Cohen's kappa statistic.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of 12,671 CDI cases eligible for linkage, 9,032 (71%) were linked to a single, unique Medicare beneficiary. Compared to EIP, sensitivity of CDI ICD-10-CM codes was 81%; codes were more likely to be present for hospitalized patients (93.0%) than those who were not (56.2%). Concordance between EIP and Medicare claims algorithms ranged from 68% to 75%, depending on the algorithm used (κ = 0.56-0.66).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>ICD-10-CM codes in Medicare claims data had high sensitivity compared to laboratory-confirmed CDI reported to EIP. Claims-based epidemiologic classification algorithms had moderate concordance with EIP classification of onset location. Misclassification of CDI onset location using Medicare algorithms may bias findings of claims-based CDI studies.</p>","PeriodicalId":13663,"journal":{"name":"Infection Control and Hospital Epidemiology","volume":" ","pages":"1-9"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Infection Control and Hospital Epidemiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/ice.2024.204","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"INFECTIOUS DISEASES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Medicare claims are frequently used to study Clostridioides difficile infection (CDI) epidemiology. However, they lack specimen collection and diagnosis dates to assign location of onset. Algorithms to classify CDI onset location using claims data have been published, but the degree of misclassification is unknown.

Methods: We linked patients with laboratory-confirmed CDI reported to four Emerging Infections Program (EIP) sites from 2016-2021 to Medicare beneficiaries with fee-for-service Part A/B coverage. We calculated sensitivity of ICD-10-CM codes in claims within ±28 days of EIP specimen collection. CDI was categorized as hospital, long-term care facility, or community-onset using three different Medicare claims-based algorithms based on claim type, ICD-10-CM code position, duration of hospitalization, and ICD-10-CM diagnosis code presence-on-admission indicators. We assessed concordance of EIP case classifications, based on chart review and specimen collection date, with claims case classifications using Cohen's kappa statistic.

Results: Of 12,671 CDI cases eligible for linkage, 9,032 (71%) were linked to a single, unique Medicare beneficiary. Compared to EIP, sensitivity of CDI ICD-10-CM codes was 81%; codes were more likely to be present for hospitalized patients (93.0%) than those who were not (56.2%). Concordance between EIP and Medicare claims algorithms ranged from 68% to 75%, depending on the algorithm used (κ = 0.56-0.66).

Conclusion: ICD-10-CM codes in Medicare claims data had high sensitivity compared to laboratory-confirmed CDI reported to EIP. Claims-based epidemiologic classification algorithms had moderate concordance with EIP classification of onset location. Misclassification of CDI onset location using Medicare algorithms may bias findings of claims-based CDI studies.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.40
自引率
6.70%
发文量
289
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Infection Control and Hospital Epidemiology provides original, peer-reviewed scientific articles for anyone involved with an infection control or epidemiology program in a hospital or healthcare facility. Written by infection control practitioners and epidemiologists and guided by an editorial board composed of the nation''s leaders in the field, ICHE provides a critical forum for this vital information.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信