Abstract

BackgroundAccurate estimates of incidence and prevalence of the disease is a vital step toward appropriate interventions for chronic disease like diabetes. A growing body of scientific literature is now available on producing accurate information from administrative data. Advantages of use of administrative data to determine disease incidence include feasibility, accessibility and low cost, but straightforward use of administrative data can produce biased information on incident cases of chronic disease like diabetes. The present study aimed to compare criteria for the selection of diabetes incident cases in a medical administrative database.MethodsAn exhaustive retrospective cohort of diabetes cases was constructed for 2002 using the Canadian National Diabetes Surveillance System case definition (one hospitalization or two physician claims with a diagnosis of diabetes over a 2-year period) with the Quebec health service database. To identify previous occurrence of diabetes in the database, a five-year observation period was evaluated using retrograde survival function and kappa agreement. The use of NDSS case definition to identify incident cases was compared to a single occurrence of an ICD-9 code 250 in the records using the McNemar test.ResultsRetrograde survival function showed that the probability of being a true incident case after a 5-year diabetes-free observation period was almost constant and near 0.14. Agreement between 10 years (maximum period) and 5 years and more diabetes-free observation periods were excellent (kappa > 0.9). Respectively 41,261 and 37,473 incident cases were identified using a 5-year diabetes-free observation period with NDSS definition and using a single ICD-9 code 250.ConclusionA 5-year diabetes-free observation period was a conservative time to identify incident cases in an administrative database using one ICD-9 code 250 record.

Highlights

  • Accurate estimates of incidence and prevalence of the disease is a vital step toward appropriate interventions for chronic disease like diabetes

  • This diabetes case definition algorithm has been adopted by the Canadian National Diabetes Surveillance System (NDSS) [7]

  • All databases were linked using a unique encrypted number that preserved the exact identification of individuals but allowed for the examination of individuals across the administrative databases

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Accurate estimates of incidence and prevalence of the disease is a vital step toward appropriate interventions for chronic disease like diabetes. Advantages of use of administrative data to determine disease incidence include feasibility, accessibility and low cost, but straightforward use of administrative data can produce biased information on incident cases of chronic disease like diabetes. Advantages of use of administrative data to estimate disease incidence include easy access, low cost, and availability of data over long and continuous periods. Occurrence of diabetes was defined as two physician claims with a diagnosis of diabetes (ICD-9 code 250) on 2 different days within 2 years or one hospital discharge with a diabetes diagnostic code in any of the 16 diagnosis fields They found an approximately 95% sensitivity of their diabetes case definition from administrative data compared to a diabetes education registry [1,6]. This diabetes case definition algorithm has been adopted by the Canadian National Diabetes Surveillance System (NDSS) [7]

Objectives
Methods
Results
Conclusion

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

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.