Abstract

ObjectiveIncreasingly, epidemiologic studies use administrative data to identify atrial fibrillation (AF). Capture of incident AF is not well documented. We examined incidence rates and concordance of AF diagnosis based on active cohort follow-up versus surveillance of Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services data in the Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities study.MethodsAtherosclerosis Risk in Communities cohort participants without prevalent AF enrolled in fee-for-service Medicare, with inpatient and outpatient coverage, for at least 12 continuous months between 1991 and 2009 were included. In active Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities study follow-up, annual telephone calls captured hospitalizations and deaths with incident AF diagnosis codes. For Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services data, incident AF was defined by billed inpatient and outpatient diagnoses.ResultsOf 10,134 eligible cohort participants, 738 developed AF according to both Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities and Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services data; an additional 93 and 288 incident cases were identified using only Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities and Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services data, respectively. Incidence rates per 1,000 person-years were 10.8 (95% confidence interval: 10.1–11.6) and 13.6 (95% confidence interval: 12.8–14.4) in Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities and Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, respectively; agreement was 96%; kappa was 0.77 (95% confidence interval: 0.75–0.80). Earlier AF ascertainment by one system versus the other was not associated with any cardiovascular disease risk factors, after accounting for sociodemographic factors. Additional Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services events did not alter observed associations between risk factors and AF.ConclusionAmong fee-for-service enrollees, AF incidence rates were slightly lower for active cohort follow-up than for Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services surveillance, because the latter included outpatient atrial fibrillation. Concordance was high and combining the two approaches could provide a more complete picture of newly-diagnosed AF.

Highlights

  • Administrative data are used for research purposes, including epidemiologic studies to identify patients with cardiovascular diseases (CVDs) [1,2,3,4,5] such as atrial fibrillation (AF) [6]

  • Of the original 15,792 Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities (ARIC) participants, our final sample included 10,134 participants who were initially free of AF and enrolled in FFS for at least 12 continuous months between January 1, 1991 and December 31, 2009

  • 18,194 person-years available to ARIC had to be omitted because those participants were in Medicare Advantage and had incomplete Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) claims (Figure 1)

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Administrative data are used for research purposes, including epidemiologic studies to identify patients with cardiovascular diseases (CVDs) [1,2,3,4,5] such as atrial fibrillation (AF) [6]. The ability to efficiently and inexpensively access information on a large number of people makes administrative claims an appealing source of outcomes for epidemiologic research. The usefulness of this approach varies by numerous factors, including the disease algorithm chosen and the population studied. Medicare data are often used but are limited to those $65 and not having supplemental health maintenance organization (HMO) coverage. High-performing algorithms have been developed to identify major CVDs [1,2,3,4,5]. A recent systematic review of algorithms used to identify AF in administrative data reported a median positive predictive value (PPV) of 89% (range: 70%–96%) and a median sensitivity of 79% (range: 57%–95%) [7]

Methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call