Zuzana Juhásová, Fatma Karapinar-Çarkit, Daniala L Weir
{"title":"The use of international classification of diseases codes to identify hospital admissions linked with adverse drug events: Validation study.","authors":"Zuzana Juhásová, Fatma Karapinar-Çarkit, Daniala L Weir","doi":"10.1002/bcp.70116","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Aims: </strong>Several methods exist to identify hospital admissions related to adverse drug events (ADEs). Clinical adjudication by healthcare professionals is the gold standard but is labour-intensive. Spontaneous reporting and routinely collected healthcare data using a set of International Classification of Diseases (ICD) codes often underestimate the prevalence of ADE-related admissions. Expanding the set of ICD codes could improve detection; however, validation is limited. The objective was to describe the agreement between ADE-related ICD-10 codes and clinically adjudicated ADE-related admissions in 2 settings.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This study analysed 2 datasets: 1102 readmissions from a hospital in the Netherlands (180 ADE-related) and 1228 admissions from a hospital in the Czech Republic (195 ADE-related). Clinical adjudication involved expert review including causality assessment to identify ADE-related hospital admissions. The sensitivities and specificities were calculated for a narrow code set (higher drug-likelihood codes containing words like drug-induced) and a broad code set of ICD-10 codes (including codes very likely, likely and possibly ADE-related).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The narrow ICD-10 set showed a sensitivity of 3% (95% confidence interval [CI] 2-6%) and a specificity of 99.6% (95% CI 99-100%). The broad set increased sensitivity to 27% (95% CI 23-32%), with specificity decreasing slightly to 92% (95% CI 91-94%). Preventable ADEs were identified less frequently with both ICD-10 code sets.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Only 3% of ADE-related admissions were detected by the narrow ICD-code set and 27% by the broad code set without a significant drop in the specificity. ADE-related ICD codes seem to serve as triggers for 1 in 4 ADE-related hospital admissions.</p>","PeriodicalId":9251,"journal":{"name":"British journal of clinical pharmacology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"British journal of clinical pharmacology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/bcp.70116","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Aims: Several methods exist to identify hospital admissions related to adverse drug events (ADEs). Clinical adjudication by healthcare professionals is the gold standard but is labour-intensive. Spontaneous reporting and routinely collected healthcare data using a set of International Classification of Diseases (ICD) codes often underestimate the prevalence of ADE-related admissions. Expanding the set of ICD codes could improve detection; however, validation is limited. The objective was to describe the agreement between ADE-related ICD-10 codes and clinically adjudicated ADE-related admissions in 2 settings.
Methods: This study analysed 2 datasets: 1102 readmissions from a hospital in the Netherlands (180 ADE-related) and 1228 admissions from a hospital in the Czech Republic (195 ADE-related). Clinical adjudication involved expert review including causality assessment to identify ADE-related hospital admissions. The sensitivities and specificities were calculated for a narrow code set (higher drug-likelihood codes containing words like drug-induced) and a broad code set of ICD-10 codes (including codes very likely, likely and possibly ADE-related).
Results: The narrow ICD-10 set showed a sensitivity of 3% (95% confidence interval [CI] 2-6%) and a specificity of 99.6% (95% CI 99-100%). The broad set increased sensitivity to 27% (95% CI 23-32%), with specificity decreasing slightly to 92% (95% CI 91-94%). Preventable ADEs were identified less frequently with both ICD-10 code sets.
Conclusions: Only 3% of ADE-related admissions were detected by the narrow ICD-code set and 27% by the broad code set without a significant drop in the specificity. ADE-related ICD codes seem to serve as triggers for 1 in 4 ADE-related hospital admissions.
目的:存在几种方法来确定与药物不良事件(ADEs)相关的住院情况。医疗保健专业人员的临床裁决是黄金标准,但这是一项劳动密集型工作。使用一套国际疾病分类(ICD)代码的自发报告和常规收集的卫生保健数据往往低估了ade相关入院的患病率。扩大ICD代码集可以提高检出率;然而,验证是有限的。目的是描述两种情况下与ade相关的ICD-10代码与临床判定的ade相关入院之间的一致性。方法:本研究分析了2个数据集:荷兰一家医院的1102例再入院患者(180例与ade相关)和捷克共和国一家医院的1228例入院患者(195例与ade相关)。临床裁决涉及专家审查,包括因果关系评估,以确定与ade相关的住院情况。敏感度和特异性计算了一个狭窄的代码集(高药物可能性代码包含单词如药物诱导)和一个广泛的代码集的ICD-10代码(包括代码非常可能,可能和可能的ade相关)。结果:狭窄的ICD-10集的敏感性为3%(95%置信区间[CI] 2-6%),特异性为99.6% (95% CI 99-100%)。广义组的敏感性增加到27% (95% CI 23-32%),特异性略微下降到92% (95% CI 91-94%)。两种ICD-10代码集对可预防ade的识别频率较低。结论:只有3%的ade相关入院患者被狭窄的icd代码集检测到,27%的患者被广泛的icd代码集检测到,但特异性没有显著下降。与ad相关的ICD代码似乎是四分之一的ad相关住院的触发因素。
期刊介绍:
Published on behalf of the British Pharmacological Society, the British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology features papers and reports on all aspects of drug action in humans: review articles, mini review articles, original papers, commentaries, editorials and letters. The Journal enjoys a wide readership, bridging the gap between the medical profession, clinical research and the pharmaceutical industry. It also publishes research on new methods, new drugs and new approaches to treatment. The Journal is recognised as one of the leading publications in its field. It is online only, publishes open access research through its OnlineOpen programme and is published monthly.