Coding algorithms for defining comorbidities in ICD-9-CM and ICD-10 administrative data

8.5kCitations
Citations of this article
1.9kReaders
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

Objectives: 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. Methods: 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. Results: 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. Conclusions: These newly developed ICD-10 and ICD-9-CM co-morbidity coding algorithms produce similar estimates of comorbidity prevalence in administrative data, and may outperform existing ICD-9-CM coding algorithms. Copyright © 2005 by Lippincott Williams & Wilkins.

Cited by Powered by Scopus

This article is free to access.

This article is free to access.

This article is free to access.

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Quan, H., Sundararajan, V., Halfon, P., Fong, A., Burnand, B., Luthi, J. C., … Ghali, W. A. (2005). Coding algorithms for defining comorbidities in ICD-9-CM and ICD-10 administrative data. Medical Care, 43(11), 1130–1139. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.mlr.0000182534.19832.83

Readers over time

‘09‘10‘11‘12‘13‘14‘15‘16‘17‘18‘19‘20‘21‘22‘23‘24‘25075150225300

Readers' Seniority

Tooltip

PhD / Post grad / Masters / Doc 665

54%

Researcher 408

33%

Professor / Associate Prof. 123

10%

Lecturer / Post doc 35

3%

Readers' Discipline

Tooltip

Medicine and Dentistry 780

78%

Nursing and Health Professions 76

8%

Social Sciences 72

7%

Economics, Econometrics and Finance 67

7%

Article Metrics

Tooltip
Mentions
Blog Mentions: 2
News Mentions: 14

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free
0