IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0231100.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Validation of algorithms to identify elective percutaneous coronary interventions in administrative databases

Author

Listed:
  • Catherine G Derington
  • Lauren J Heath
  • David P Kao
  • Thomas Delate

Abstract

Background: Elective percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI) are difficult to discriminate from non-elective PCI in administrative data due to non-specific encounter codes, limiting the ability to track outcomes, ensure appropriate medical management, and/or perform research on patients who undergo elective PCI. The objective of this study was to assess the abilities of several algorithms to identify elective PCI procedures using administrative data containing diagnostic, utilization, and/or procedural codes. Methods and results: For this retrospective study, administrative databases in an integrated healthcare delivery system were queried between 1/1/2015 and 6/31/2016 to identify patients who had an encounter for a PCI. Using clinical criteria, each encounter was classified via chart review as a valid PCI, then as elective or non-elective. Cases were tested against nine pre-determined algorithms. Performance statistics (sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value) and associated 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated. Of 521 PCI encounters reviewed, 497 were valid PCI, 93 of which were elective. An algorithm that excluded emergency room visit events had the highest sensitivity (97.9%, 95%CI 92.5%-99.7%) while an algorithm that included events occurring within 90 days of a cardiologist visit and coronary angiogram or stress test had the highest positive predictive value (62.2%, 95%CI 50.8%-72.7%). Conclusions: Without an encounter code specific for elective PCI, an algorithm excluding procedures associated with an emergency room visit had the highest sensitivity to identify elective PCI. This offers a reasonable approach to identify elective PCI from administrative data.

Suggested Citation

  • Catherine G Derington & Lauren J Heath & David P Kao & Thomas Delate, 2020. "Validation of algorithms to identify elective percutaneous coronary interventions in administrative databases," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(4), pages 1-13, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0231100
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0231100
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0231100
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0231100&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0231100?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0231100. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.