Coding Algorithms for Defining Comorbidities in ICD-9-CM and ICD-10 Administrative Data
Top Cited Papers
- 1 November 2005
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Wolters Kluwer Health in Medical Care
- Vol. 43 (11) , 1130-1139
- https://doi.org/10.1097/01.mlr.0000182534.19832.83
Abstract
Implementation of the International Statistical Classification of Disease and Related Health Problems, 10th Revision (ICD-10) coding system presents challenges for using administrative data. Recognizing this, we conducted a multistep process to develop ICD-10 coding algorithms to define Charlson and Elixhauser comorbidities in administrative data and assess the performance of the resulting algorithms. ICD-10 coding algorithms were developed by “translation” of the ICD-9-CM codes constituting Deyo's (for Charlson comorbidities) and Elixhauser's coding algorithms and by physicians’ assessment of the face-validity of selected ICD-10 codes. The process of carefully developing ICD-10 algorithms also produced modified and enhanced ICD-9-CM coding algorithms for the Charlson and Elixhauser comorbidities. We then used data on in-patients aged 18 years and older in ICD-9-CM and ICD-10 administrative hospital discharge data from a Canadian health region to assess the comorbidity frequencies and mortality prediction achieved by the original ICD-9-CM algorithms, the enhanced ICD-9-CM algorithms, and the new ICD-10 coding algorithms. Among 56,585 patients in the ICD-9-CM data and 58,805 patients in the ICD-10 data, frequencies of the 17 Charlson comorbidities and the 30 Elixhauser comorbidities remained generally similar across algorithms. The new ICD-10 and enhanced ICD-9-CM coding algorithms either matched or outperformed the original Deyo and Elixhauser ICD-9-CM coding algorithms in predicting in-hospital mortality. The C-statistic was 0.842 for Deyo's ICD-9-CM coding algorithm, 0.860 for the ICD-10 coding algorithm, and 0.859 for the enhanced ICD-9-CM coding algorithm, 0.868 for the original Elixhauser ICD-9-CM coding algorithm, 0.870 for the ICD-10 coding algorithm and 0.878 for the enhanced ICD-9-CM coding algorithm. These newly developed ICD-10 and ICD-9-CM comorbidity coding algorithms produce similar estimates of comorbidity prevalence in administrative data, and may outperform existing ICD-9-CM coding algorithms.Keywords
This publication has 15 references indexed in Scilit:
- New ICD-10 version of the Charlson comorbidity index predicted in-hospital mortalityJournal of Clinical Epidemiology, 2004
- Measuring potentially avoidable hospital readmissionsJournal of Clinical Epidemiology, 2002
- Comorbidity Measures for Use with Administrative DataMedical Care, 1998
- Evaluation of two competing methods for calculating Charlson's comorbidity index when analyzing short-term mortality using administrative dataJournal of Clinical Epidemiology, 1997
- Practical considerations on the use of the charlson comorbidity index with administrative data basesJournal of Clinical Epidemiology, 1996
- Searching for an improved clinical comorbidity index for use with ICD-9-CM administrative dataJournal of Clinical Epidemiology, 1996
- Further evidence concerning the use of a clinical comorbidity index with ICD-9-CM administrative dataJournal of Clinical Epidemiology, 1993
- Presentation adapting a clinical comorbidity index for use with ICD-9-CM administrative data: Differing perspectivesJournal of Clinical Epidemiology, 1993
- Adapting a clinical comorbidity index for use with ICD-9-CM administrative databasesJournal of Clinical Epidemiology, 1992
- A new method of classifying prognostic comorbidity in longitudinal studies: Development and validationJournal of Chronic Diseases, 1987