EducationEvaluating diagnostic accuracy in appendicitis using administrative data11
Introduction
The lifetime risk of developing appendicitis has been estimated to be 6–9% [1], and appendectomy remains the most frequently performed emergency abdominal surgical procedure. Because it is such a commonly occurring disease and its diagnosis and treatment involves caregivers from many specialties, complex quality of care issues remain to be addressed. Studying the incidence of uncommon but preventable complications in the management of appendicitis requires a large number of patients, which in turn requires either burdensome chart reviews or more costly, prospective data gathering. The use of administrative data for the study of appendectomy and appendicitis may be appealing because these data provide population level information without many of the cost and logistical difficulties of other study designs. Administrative data in appendicitis have been used to assess the basic epidemiology of appendicitis [1], temporal changes in diagnosis and management [2, 3], variations in resource utilization and patient outcome [4, 5], and disparities in care [6, 7].
In evaluating diagnostic accuracy in appendicitis, techniques based on administrative data typically are used to count the number of patients who had a nonincidental appendectomy (appendectomy not being performed incidental to other surgical procedures) but did not have appendicitis. This form of misdiagnosis manifests as a “negative appendectomy” (NA) and may be an important marker of the quality of care as it entails an operative procedure in the absence of the assumed pathology. The frequency of NA also may be important in tracking the accuracy of different diagnostic regimens for right-sided abdominal pain and of the effectiveness of advanced diagnostic technology such as computed tomography and ultrasound in general practice.
This study was designed to assess the validity of a technique first described by Addiss et al. [1] using administrative data to assess the frequency of appendicitis in patients undergoing appendectomy and rates of NA. This approach essentially relies on a high level of sensitivity and specificity of diagnostic codes for appendicitis. With this technique, a patient is described as being accurately diagnosed if an appendectomy procedure code is associated with an appendicitis diagnostic code. A patient is classified as having had a NA if the patient’s administrative record includes a procedure code for a nonincidental appendectomy without an associated diagnostic code of appendicitis. To date, there has been no validation of this technique. Because the validity of diagnostic coding has come under increased scrutiny, we proposed this study to evaluate the accuracy of this technique.
Section snippets
Study design
This methodologic substudy was a component of a larger project performed at the Group Health Cooperative (GHC) of Puget Sound, using a computerized, population-based database to evaluate the incidence of NA. That study involved chart analysis of a subset of patients who underwent appendectomy in the 1990s, and the methodologic substudy was designed to compare the administrative coding of appendicitis and NA with clinical-pathologic data.
Setting
Group Health Cooperative (GHC) of Puget Sound is a large
Results
Between 1991–1999, 1823 nonincidental appendectomies were performed in the GHC system (mean age 31 ± 18.6 years, 49.6% female). Of these, 280 were classified as NA by the administrative-data method (15.4% of total; 8.3% of men versus 24% of women [P < 0.001]). Medical records of 614 patients were reviewed, including all 280 patients who were thought to have had a NA based on administrative coding and a random sample of 334 patients found to have to have appendicitis by administrative codes (
Discussion
Administrative data contain information usually gathered about patients for the purpose of billing and tracking resource utilization. Although primarily captured for other purposes, the use of administrative data to assess quality of care is attractive because elements of the administrative record can be applied to clinical questions. While the use of administrative data are appealing because of its low cost, ease of access and population-based implications, there may be serious problems with
References (14)
- et al.
The epidemiology of appendicitis and appendectomy in the United States
Am. J. Epidemiol. Nov.
(1990) - et al.
Has misdiagnosis of appendicitis decreased over time? A population-based analysis
JAMA
(2001) - et al.
Diagnostic accuracy and short-term surgical outcomes in cases of suspected acute appendicitis
CMAJ
(1995) - et al.
The clinical and economic correlates of misdiagnosed appendicitisnationwide analysis
Arch. Surg.
(2002) - et al.
The risk of appendiceal rupture based on hospital admission source
Acad. Emerg. Med.
(1999) - et al.
Laparoscopic versus open appendectomyoutcomes comparison based on a large administrative database
Ann. Surg.
(2004) - et al.
Ruptured appendicitis among children as an indicator of access to care
Health Serv. Res.
(2001)
Cited by (0)
- 1
The Robert Wood Johnson Foundation provided funding for this project. The views expressed in this article are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation or the University of Washington.