• J Pain Symptom Manage · Oct 2023

    Validation of electronic health record-based algorithms to identify specialist palliative care within the Department of Veterans Affairs.

    • Shelli L Feder, Yan Zhan, Erica A Abel, Dawn Smith, Mary Ersek, Terri Fried, Nancy S Redeker, and Kathleen M Akgün.
    • Yale School of Nursing (S.L.F., Y.Z.), Orange, Connecticut, USA; VA Connecticut Healthcare System (S.L.F., E.A.A., T.F., K.M.A.), West Haven, Connecticut, USA. Electronic address: shelli.feder@yale.edu.
    • J Pain Symptom Manage. 2023 Oct 1; 66 (4): e475e483e475-e483.

    BackgroundThe measurement of specialist palliative care (SPC) across Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) facilities relies on algorithms applied to administrative databases. However, the validity of these algorithms has not been systematically assessed.MeasuresIn a cohort of people with heart failure identified by ICD 9/10 codes, we validated the performance of algorithms to identify SPC consultation in administrative data and differentiate outpatient from inpatient encounters.InterventionWe derived separate samples of people by receipt of SPC using combinations of stop codes signifying specific clinics, current procedural terminology (CPT), a variable representing encounter location, and ICD-9/ICD-10 codes for SPC. We calculated sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values (PPV, NPV) for each algorithm using chart review as the reference standard.OutcomesAmong 200 people who did and did not receive SPC (mean age = 73.9 years (standard deviation [SD] = 11.5), 98% male, 73% White), the validity of the stop code plus CPT algorithm to identify any SPC consultation was: Sensitivity = 0.89 (95% Confidence Interval [CI] 0.82-0.94), Specificity = 1.0 [0.96-1.0], PPV = 1.0 [0.96-1.0], NPV = 0.93 [0.86-0.97]. The addition of ICD codes increased sensitivity but decreased specificity. Among 200 people who received SPC (mean age = 74.2 years [SD = 11.8], 99% male, 71% White), algorithm performance in differentiating outpatient from inpatient encounters was: Sensitivity = 0.95 (0.88-0.99), Specificity = 0.81 (0.72-0.87), PPV = 0.38 (0.29-0.49), and NPV = 0.99 (0.95-1.0). Adding encounter location improved the sensitivity and specificity of this algorithm.ConclusionsVA algorithms are highly sensitive and specific in identifying SPC and in differentiating outpatient from inpatient encounters. These algorithms can be used with confidence to measure SPC in quality improvement and research across the VA.Copyright © 2023 American Academy of Hospice and Palliative Medicine. All rights reserved.

      Pubmed     Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…

What will the 'Medical Journal of You' look like?

Start your free 21 day trial now.

We guarantee your privacy. Your email address will not be shared.