The validity of administrative data to identify hip fractures is high : A systematic review

Objective: To determine the validity of the diagnostic algorithms for osteoporosis and fractures in administrative data. Study Design and Setting: A systematic search was conducted to identify studies that reported the validity of a diagnostic algorithm for osteoporosis and/or fractures using administrative data. Results Twelve studies were reviewed. The validity of the diagnosis of osteoporosis in administrative data was fair when at least three years of data from hospital and physician visit claims were used (area under the receiver operating characteristic [ROC] curve [AUC] = 0.70) or when pharmacy data were used (with or without the use of hospital and physician visit claims data, AUC > 0.70). Nonetheless, the positive predictive values (PPV) were low (< 0.60). There was good evidence to support the use of hospital data to identify hip fractures (sensitivity 69-97%; PPV 63-96%) and the addition of physician claims diagnostic and procedural codes to hospitalization diagnostic codes improved these characteristics (sensitivity 83-97%; PPV 86-98%). Vertebral fractures were difficult to identify using administrative data. There was some evidence to support the use of administrative data to define other fractures that do not require hospitalization. Conclusions Administrative data can be used to identify hip fractures. Existing diagnostic algorithms to identify osteoporosis and vertebral fractures in administrative data are suboptimal.Medicine, Faculty ofNon UBCMedicine, Department ofReviewedFacult

Additional file 1: of Central intake to improve access to physiotherapy for children with complex needs: a mixed methods case report

Semi-structured interview guide. (DOC 24 kb

Estimation de l’exhaustivité des demandes de remboursement des médecins dans une optique de détermination des cas de diabète : étude menée dans plusieurs provinces

IntroductionDes recherches antérieures ont suggéré que le mode de rémunération des médecins peut avoir une influence sur l’exhaustivité des demandes de remboursement lors de l’estimation des maladies chroniques. Le but de cette étude est d’estimer l’exhaustivité des données sur la facturation des médecins dans l’optique de déterminer des cas de diabète. MéthodologieNous avons utilisé les données administratives de huit provinces canadiennes pour la période du 1er avril 2014 au 31 mars 2016. Nous avons divisé la cohorte de patients en deux groupes mutuellement exclusifs en fonction du mode de rémunération de leur médecin : médecins rémunérés à l’acte pour ceux payés uniquement de cette façon et médecins non rémunérés à l’acte pour les autres. À l’aide des données sur les ordonnances de médicaments hypoglycémiants (source de nos données de référence), nous avons évalué si les cas de maladie avaient été déterminés avec la même exactitude en fonction du mode de rémunération. Nous avons ensuite corrigé les taux d’incidence du diabète afin d’optimiser l’exhaustivité des cas déterminés. RésultatsLa cohorte comprenait 86 110 patients. Dans l’ensemble, des proportions égales de patients ont reçu leurs médicaments hypoglycémiants de la part de médecins rémunérés à l’acte et de médecins non rémunérés à l’acte. Globalement, le mode de rémunération des médecins a eu peu d’effet sur le pourcentage de cas de diabète omis (14,8 % chez les médecins rémunérés à l’acte contre 12,2 % chez les médecins non rémunérés à l’acte). Toutefois, la différence de cas omis entre les médecins rémunérés à l’acte et ceux non rémunérés à l’acte était très variable d’une province à l’autre, allant de -1,0 % en Nouvelle-Écosse à 29,9 % à Terre-Neuve-et-Labrador. La différence entre les taux observés d’incidence de la maladie et les taux corrigés était également variable d’une province à l’autre, allant de 22 % à l’Île-du-Prince-Édouard à 4 % en Nouvelle-Écosse. ConclusionLa différence entre le nombre de cas omis selon le mode de rémunération des médecins est variable d’une province à l’autre. Cette perte de données contribue probablement à une sous-estimation de l’incidence de la maladie. Il serait possible d’appliquer la méthode que nous avons utilisée à d’autres maladies chroniques pour lesquelles des données de traitement pharmacologique pourraient servir de données de référence

Estimating the completeness of physician billing claims for diabetes case ascertainment: a multiprovince investigation

IntroductionPrevious research has suggested that how physicians are paid may affect the completeness of billing claims for estimating chronic disease. The purpose of this study is to estimate the completeness of physician billings for diabetes case ascertainment. MethodsWe used administrative data from eight Canadian provinces covering the period 1 April 2014 to 31 March 2016. The patient cohort was stratified into two mutually exclusive groups based on their physician remuneration type: fee-for-service (FFS), for those paid only on that basis; and non-fee-for-service (NFFS). Using diabetes prescription drug data as our reference data source, we evaluated whether completeness of disease case ascertainment varied with payment type. Diabetes incidence rates were then adjusted for completeness of ascertainment. ResultsThe cohort comprised 86 110 patients. Overall, equal proportions received their diabetes medications from FFS and NFFS physicians. Overall, physician payment method had little impact upon the percentage of missed diabetes cases (FFS, 14.8%; NFFS, 12.2%). However, the difference in missed cases between FFS and NFFS varied widely by province, ranging from −1.0% in Nova Scotia to 29.9% in Newfoundland and Labrador. The difference between the observed and adjusted disease incidence rates also varied by province, ranging from 22% in Prince Edward Island to 4% in Nova Scotia. ConclusionThe difference in the loss of cases by physician remuneration method varied across jurisdictions. This loss may contribute to an underestimation of disease incidence. The method we used could be applied to other chronic diseases for which drug therapy could serve as reference data source

Respiratory support in patients with severe COVID-19 in the International Severe Acute Respiratory and Emerging Infection (ISARIC) COVID-19 study: a prospective, multinational, observational study

Background: Up to 30% of hospitalised patients with COVID-19 require advanced respiratory support, including high-flow nasal cannulas (HFNC), non-invasive mechanical ventilation (NIV), or invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV). We aimed to describe the clinical characteristics, outcomes and risk factors for failing non-invasive respiratory support in patients treated with severe COVID-19 during the first two years of the pandemic in high-income countries (HICs) and low middle-income countries (LMICs). Methods: This is a multinational, multicentre, prospective cohort study embedded in the ISARIC-WHO COVID-19 Clinical Characterisation Protocol. Patients with laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection who required hospital admission were recruited prospectively. Patients treated with HFNC, NIV, or IMV within the first 24 h of hospital admission were included in this study. Descriptive statistics, random forest, and logistic regression analyses were used to describe clinical characteristics and compare clinical outcomes among patients treated with the different types of advanced respiratory support. Results: A total of 66,565 patients were included in this study. Overall, 82.6% of patients were treated in HIC, and 40.6% were admitted to the hospital during the first pandemic wave. During the first 24 h after hospital admission, patients in HICs were more frequently treated with HFNC (48.0%), followed by NIV (38.6%) and IMV (13.4%). In contrast, patients admitted in lower- and middle-income countries (LMICs) were less frequently treated with HFNC (16.1%) and the majority received IMV (59.1%). The failure rate of non-invasive respiratory support (i.e. HFNC or NIV) was 15.5%, of which 71.2% were from HIC and 28.8% from LMIC. The variables most strongly associated with non-invasive ventilation failure, defined as progression to IMV, were high leukocyte counts at hospital admission (OR [95%CI]; 5.86 [4.83–7.10]), treatment in an LMIC (OR [95%CI]; 2.04 [1.97–2.11]), and tachypnoea at hospital admission (OR [95%CI]; 1.16 [1.14–1.18]). Patients who failed HFNC/NIV had a higher 28-day fatality ratio (OR [95%CI]; 1.27 [1.25–1.30]). Conclusions: In the present international cohort, the most frequently used advanced respiratory support was the HFNC. However, IMV was used more often in LMIC. Higher leucocyte count, tachypnoea, and treatment in LMIC were risk factors for HFNC/NIV failure. HFNC/NIV failure was related to worse clinical outcomes, such as 28-day mortality. Trial registration This is a prospective observational study; therefore, no health care interventions were applied to participants, and trial registration is not applicable

The value of open-source clinical science in pandemic response: lessons from ISARIC

International audienc