Approaches to ascertaining comorbidity information: validation of routine hospital episode data with clinician-based case note review

Martin Soo, Lynn M Robertson, Tariq Ali, Laura E Clark, Nicholas Fluck, Marjorie Johnston, Angharad Marks, Gordon J Prescott, William Cairns S Smith, Corri Black, GLOMMS Group

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

17 Citations (Scopus)
10 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

Background
In clinical practice, research, and increasingly health surveillance, planning and costing, there is a need for high quality information to determine comorbidity information about patients. Electronic, routinely collected healthcare data is capturing increasing amounts of clinical information as part of routine care. The aim of this study was to assess the validity of routine hospital administrative data to determine comorbidity, as compared with clinician-based case note review, in a large cohort of patients with chronic kidney disease.

Methods
A validation study using record linkage. Routine hospital administrative data were compared with clinician-based case note review comorbidity data in a cohort of 3219 patients with chronic kidney disease. To assess agreement, we calculated prevalence, kappa statistic, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value and negative predictive value. Subgroup analyses were also performed.

Results
Median age at index date was 76.3 years, 44% were male, 67% had stage 3 chronic kidney disease and 31% had at least three comorbidities. For most comorbidities, we found a higher prevalence recorded from case notes compared with administrative data. The best agreement was found for cerebrovascular disease (κ = 0.80) ischaemic heart disease (κ = 0.63) and diabetes (κ = 0.65). Hypertension, peripheral vascular disease and dementia showed only fair agreement (κ = 0.28, 0.39, 0.38 respectively) and smoking status was found to be poorly recorded in administrative data. The patterns of prevalence across subgroups were as expected and for most comorbidities, agreement between case note and administrative data was similar. Agreement was less, however, in older ages and for those with three or more comorbidities for some conditions.

Conclusions
This study demonstrates that hospital administrative comorbidity data compared moderately well with case note review data for cerebrovascular disease, ischaemic heart disease and diabetes, however there was significant under-recording of some other comorbid conditions, and particularly common risk factors.
Original languageEnglish
Article number253
Number of pages8
JournalBMC Research Notes
Volume7
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 21 Apr 2014

    Fingerprint

Keywords

  • chronic kidney disease
  • validation study
  • medical record linkage
  • patient outcomes
  • public health

Cite this