header advert
Orthopaedic Proceedings Logo

Receive monthly Table of Contents alerts from Orthopaedic Proceedings

Comprehensive article alerts can be set up and managed through your account settings

View my account settings

Visit Orthopaedic Proceedings at:

Loading...

Loading...

Full Access

General Orthopaedics

CAN WE TRUST STUDIES BASED ON PROSTHESIS-RELATED INFECTION CODES FROM ADMINISTRATIVE DISCHARGE REGISTERS?

European Bone And Joint Infection Society (EBJIS) 34th Annual Meeting: PART 1



Abstract

There is an apparent need for easily accessible research data on Periprosthetic hip joint infections (PJI)(1). Administrative discharge registers could be a valuable single-sources for this purpose, and studies originating from such registers have been published(2–4). However, the quality of routinely collected data for administrative purposes may be questionable for use in epidemiological research. The aim of this study was to estimate the positive predictive value of the International Classification of Disease 10th revision (ICD-10) periprosthetic hip joint infection diagnose code T84.5.

The study was performed as a cross-sectional study on data extracted from the Danish National Patient Register. Patients with a registration of performed surgical treatment for hip PJI were identified via the ICD-10 code T84.5 (Infection and inflammatory reaction due to internal joint prosthesis) in association with hip-joint associated surgical procedure codes. Medical records of the identified patients (n=283) were verified for the existence of a periprosthetic hip joint infection. Positive predictive values with 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) were calculated.

A T84.5 diagnosis code irrespective of the associated surgical procedure code had a positive predictive value of 85 % (95% CI: 80–89). Stratified to T84.5 in combination with an infection-specific surgical procedure code the positive predictive value increased to 86% (95% CI: 80–91), and in combination with a noninfection-specific surgical procedure code decreased to 82% (95% CI: 72–89).

This study is the first to evaluate the only discharge diagnose code of prosthesis-related infection in an administrative discharge register. It is apparent, that codes in administrative discharge registers are prone to misclassification on an administrative level, either by wrongful coding by the physician or administrative personal in the registration process. Misclassification must be expected and taken into consideration when using single-source administrative discharge registers for epidemiological research on periprosthetic hip joint infection. We believe that the periprosthetic hip joint infection diagnose code can be of use in single-source register based studies, but preferably should be used in combination with alternate data sources to ensure higher validity(5)

This study is funded in part by the Lundbeck foundation Centre for Fast-track Hip and Knee Surgery, Denmark.


E-mail: