Abstract
Objective: The objective of the study was to estimate the validity of obstetric procedures and diagnoses in California patient discharge data. Study design: We randomly sampled 1611 deliveries from 52 of 267 California hospitals that performed more than 678 eligible deliveries in 1992 to 1993. We compared hospital-reported procedures and diagnoses against our recoding of the same records. Results: Cesarean, forceps, and vacuum delivery were accurately reported, with sensitivities and positive predictive values exceeding 90%. Episiotomy was underreported (70% sensitivity). Cesarean indications were reported with at least 60% sensitivity, except uterine inertia, herpes, and long labor. Among comorbidities, sensitivity exceeded 60% for chorioamnionitis, diabetes, premature labor, preeclampsia, and intrauterine death. Sensitivity was poor (less than 60%) for anemia, asthma, thyroid disorders, mental disorders, drug abuse, genitourinary infections, obesity, fibroids, excessive fetal growth, hypertension, premature rupture, polyhydramnios, and postdates. Conclusion: The validity of hospital-reported obstetric procedures and diagnoses varies, with moderate to high accuracy for some codes but poor accuracy for others.
| Original language | English (US) |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 992-1001 |
| Number of pages | 10 |
| Journal | American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology |
| Volume | 194 |
| Issue number | 4 |
| DOIs | |
| State | Published - Apr 2006 |
Fingerprint
Keywords
- Accuracy
- Administrative data
- Obstetrics
- Risk factors
- Validity
ASJC Scopus subject areas
- Medicine(all)
- Obstetrics and Gynecology
Cite this
Accuracy of obstetric diagnoses and procedures in hospital discharge data. / Yasmeen, Shagufta; Romano, Patrick S; Schembri, Michael E.; Keyzer, Janet M.; Gilbert, William M.
In: American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Vol. 194, No. 4, 04.2006, p. 992-1001.Research output: Contribution to journal › Article
}
TY - JOUR
T1 - Accuracy of obstetric diagnoses and procedures in hospital discharge data
AU - Yasmeen, Shagufta
AU - Romano, Patrick S
AU - Schembri, Michael E.
AU - Keyzer, Janet M.
AU - Gilbert, William M.
PY - 2006/4
Y1 - 2006/4
N2 - Objective: The objective of the study was to estimate the validity of obstetric procedures and diagnoses in California patient discharge data. Study design: We randomly sampled 1611 deliveries from 52 of 267 California hospitals that performed more than 678 eligible deliveries in 1992 to 1993. We compared hospital-reported procedures and diagnoses against our recoding of the same records. Results: Cesarean, forceps, and vacuum delivery were accurately reported, with sensitivities and positive predictive values exceeding 90%. Episiotomy was underreported (70% sensitivity). Cesarean indications were reported with at least 60% sensitivity, except uterine inertia, herpes, and long labor. Among comorbidities, sensitivity exceeded 60% for chorioamnionitis, diabetes, premature labor, preeclampsia, and intrauterine death. Sensitivity was poor (less than 60%) for anemia, asthma, thyroid disorders, mental disorders, drug abuse, genitourinary infections, obesity, fibroids, excessive fetal growth, hypertension, premature rupture, polyhydramnios, and postdates. Conclusion: The validity of hospital-reported obstetric procedures and diagnoses varies, with moderate to high accuracy for some codes but poor accuracy for others.
AB - Objective: The objective of the study was to estimate the validity of obstetric procedures and diagnoses in California patient discharge data. Study design: We randomly sampled 1611 deliveries from 52 of 267 California hospitals that performed more than 678 eligible deliveries in 1992 to 1993. We compared hospital-reported procedures and diagnoses against our recoding of the same records. Results: Cesarean, forceps, and vacuum delivery were accurately reported, with sensitivities and positive predictive values exceeding 90%. Episiotomy was underreported (70% sensitivity). Cesarean indications were reported with at least 60% sensitivity, except uterine inertia, herpes, and long labor. Among comorbidities, sensitivity exceeded 60% for chorioamnionitis, diabetes, premature labor, preeclampsia, and intrauterine death. Sensitivity was poor (less than 60%) for anemia, asthma, thyroid disorders, mental disorders, drug abuse, genitourinary infections, obesity, fibroids, excessive fetal growth, hypertension, premature rupture, polyhydramnios, and postdates. Conclusion: The validity of hospital-reported obstetric procedures and diagnoses varies, with moderate to high accuracy for some codes but poor accuracy for others.
KW - Accuracy
KW - Administrative data
KW - Obstetrics
KW - Risk factors
KW - Validity
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=33645857989&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=33645857989&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.ajog.2005.08.058
DO - 10.1016/j.ajog.2005.08.058
M3 - Article
C2 - 16580288
AN - SCOPUS:33645857989
VL - 194
SP - 992
EP - 1001
JO - American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology
JF - American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology
SN - 0002-9378
IS - 4
ER -