Comparing methods for identifying patients with heart failure using electronic data sourcesReportar como inadecuado




Comparing methods for identifying patients with heart failure using electronic data sources - Descarga este documento en PDF. Documentación en PDF para descargar gratis. Disponible también para leer online.

BMC Health Services Research

, 9:237

First Online: 18 December 2009Received: 28 April 2009Accepted: 18 December 2009DOI: 10.1186-1472-6963-9-237

Cite this article as: Alqaisi, F., Williams, L.K., Peterson, E.L. et al. BMC Health Serv Res 2009 9: 237. doi:10.1186-1472-6963-9-237

Abstract

BackgroundAccurately indentifying heart failure HF patients from administrative claims data is useful for both research and quality of care efforts. Yet, there are few comparisons of the various claims data criteria also known as claims signatures for identifying HF patients. We compared various HF claim signatures to assess their relative accuracy.

MethodsIn this retrospective study, we identified 4174 patients who received care from a large health system in southeast Michigan and who had ≥1 HF encounter between January 1, 2004 and December 31, 2005. Four hundred patients were chosen at random and a detailed chart review was performed to assess which met the Framingham HF criteria. The sample was divided into 300 subjects for derivation and 100 subjects for validation. Sensitivity, specificity,, and area under the curve AUC were determined for the various claim signatures. The criteria with the highest AUC were retested in the validation set.

ResultsOf the 400 patients sampled, 65% met Framingham HF criteria, and 56% had at least one B-type Natriuretic Peptide BNP measurement. There was substantial variation between claims signatures in terms of sensitivity range 15%-77% and specificity range 69%-100%. The best performing criteria in the derivation set was if patients met any one of the following: ≥2 HF encounters, any hospital discharge diagnosis of HF, or a BNP ≥200 pg-ml. These criteria showed a sensitivity of 76%, specificity of 75%, and AUC of 0.754 for meeting the Framingham HF criteria. This claims signature performed similarly in the validation set.

ConclusionClaim signatures for HF vary greatly in their relative sensitivity and specificity. These findings may facilitate efforts to identify HF patients for research and quality improvement efforts.

Fadi Alqaisi, L Keoki Williams contributed equally to this work.

Download fulltext PDF



Autor: Fadi Alqaisi - L Keoki Williams - Edward L Peterson - David E Lanfear

Fuente: https://link.springer.com/







Documentos relacionados