| Popis: |
Tou-Yuan Tsai,1– 3,* Jen-Feng Lin,4,* Yu-Kang Tu,3 Jian-Heng Lee,4 Yu-Ting Hsiao,4 Sheng-Feng Sung,5 Ming-Jen Tsai4 1Department of Emergency Medicine, Dalin Tzu Chi Hospital, Buddhist Tzu Chi Medical Foundation, Chiayi, Taiwan; 2School of Medicine, Tzu Chi University, Hualien, Taiwan; 3Institute of Epidemiology and Preventive Medicine, College of Public Health, National Taiwan University, Taipei, Taiwan; 4Department of Emergency Medicine, Ditmanson Medical Foundation Chia-Yi Christian Hospital, Chiayi City, Taiwan; 5Division of Neurology, Department of Internal Medicine, Ditmanson Medical Foundation Chia-Yi Christian Hospital, Chiayi City, Taiwan*These authors contributed equally to this workCorrespondence: Sheng-Feng Sung, Division of Neurology, Department of Internal Medicine, Ditmanson Medical Foundation Chia-Yi Christian Hospital, Chiayi City, Taiwan, Tel +886 5 276 5041 Ext 7283, Fax +886 5 278 4257, Email sfusng@cych.org.tw; richard.sfsung@gmail.com Ming-Jen Tsai, Department of Emergency Medicine, Ditmanson Medical Foundation Chia-Yi Christian Hospital, Chiayi City, Taiwan, Tel +886 5 276 5041 Ext 1909, Fax +886 5 277 4511, Email tshi33@gmail.comPurpose: Distinguishing ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) and non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) is crucial in acute myocardial infarction (AMI) research due to their distinct characteristics. However, the accuracy of International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision, Clinical Modification (ICD-10-CM) codes for STEMI and NSTEMI in Taiwan’s National Health Insurance (NHI) database remains unvalidated. Therefore, we developed and validated case definition algorithms for STEMI and NSTEMI using ICD-10-CM and NHI billing codes.Patients and Methods: We obtained claims data and medical records of inpatient visits from 2016 to 2021 from the hospital’s research-based database. Potential STEMI and NSTEMI cases were identified using diagnostic codes, keywords, and procedure codes associated with AMI. Chart reviews were then conducted to confirm the cases. The performance of the developed algorithms for STEMI and NSTEMI was assessed and subsequently externally validated.Results: The algorithm that defined STEMI as any STEMI ICD code in the first three diagnosis fields had the highest performance, with a sensitivity of 93.6% (95% confidence interval [CI], 91.7– 95.2%), a positive predictive value (PPV) of 89.4% (95% CI, 87.1– 91.4%), and a kappa of 0.914 (95% CI, 0.900– 0.928). The algorithm that used the NSTEMI ICD code listed in any diagnosis field performed best in identifying NSTEMI, with a sensitivity of 82.6% (95% CI, 80.7– 84.4%), a PPV of 96.5% (95% CI, 95.4– 97.4), and a kappa of 0.889 (95% CI, 0.878– 0.901). The algorithm that included either STEMI or NSTEMI ICD codes listed in any diagnosis field showed excellent performance in defining AMI, with a sensitivity of 89.4% (95% CI, 88.2– 90.6%), a PPV of 95.6% (95% CI, 94.7– 96.4%), and a kappa of 0.923 (95% CI, 0.915– 0.931). External validation confirmed these algorithms’ efficacy.Conclusion: Our results provide valuable reference algorithms for identifying STEMI and NSTEMI cases in Taiwan’s NHI database.Keywords: administrative claims data, acute myocardial infarction, diagnosis, ICD-10-CM, non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction, ST-elevation myocardial infarction |
