11
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Validating Use of Electronic Health Data to Identify Patients with Urinary Tract Infections in Outpatient Settings

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Objective: To validate the use of electronic algorithms based on International Classification of Diseases (ICD)-10 codes to identify outpatient visits for urinary tract infections (UTI), one of the most common reasons for antibiotic prescriptions. Methods: ICD-10 symptom codes (e.g., dysuria) alone or in addition to UTI diagnosis codes plus prescription of a UTI-relevant antibiotic were used to identify outpatient UTI visits. Chart review (gold standard) was performed by two reviewers to confirm diagnosis of UTI. The positive predictive value (PPV) that the visit was for UTI (based on chart review) was calculated for three different ICD-10 code algorithms using (1) symptoms only, (2) diagnosis only, or (3) both. Results: Of the 1087 visits analyzed, symptom codes only had the lowest PPV for UTI (PPV = 55.4%; 95%CI: 49.3–61.5%). Diagnosis codes alone resulted in a PPV of 85% (PPV = 84.9%; 95%CI: 81.1–88.2%). The highest PPV was obtained by using both symptom and diagnosis codes together to identify visits with UTI (PPV = 96.3%; 95%CI: 94.5–97.9%). Conclusions: ICD-10 diagnosis codes with or without symptom codes reliably identify UTI visits; symptom codes alone are not reliable. ICD-10 based algorithms are a valid method to study UTIs in primary care settings.

          Related collections

          Most cited references27

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: found
          Is Open Access

          Sensitivity, Specificity, and Predictive Values: Foundations, Pliabilities, and Pitfalls in Research and Practice

          Within the context of screening tests, it is important to avoid misconceptions about sensitivity, specificity, and predictive values. In this article, therefore, foundations are first established concerning these metrics along with the first of several aspects of pliability that should be recognized in relation to those metrics. Clarification is then provided about the definitions of sensitivity, specificity, and predictive values and why researchers and clinicians can misunderstand and misrepresent them. Arguments are made that sensitivity and specificity should usually be applied only in the context of describing a screening test’s attributes relative to a reference standard; that predictive values are more appropriate and informative in actual screening contexts, but that sensitivity and specificity can be used for screening decisions about individual people if they are extremely high; that predictive values need not always be high and might be used to advantage by adjusting the sensitivity and specificity of screening tests; that, in screening contexts, researchers should provide information about all four metrics and how they were derived; and that, where necessary, consumers of health research should have the skills to interpret those metrics effectively for maximum benefit to clients and the healthcare system.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            International clinical practice guidelines for the treatment of acute uncomplicated cystitis and pyelonephritis in women: A 2010 update by the Infectious Diseases Society of America and the European Society for Microbiology and Infectious Diseases.

            A Panel of International Experts was convened by the Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA) in collaboration with the European Society for Microbiology and Infectious Diseases (ESCMID) to update the 1999 Uncomplicated Urinary Tract Infection Guidelines by the IDSA. Co-sponsoring organizations include the American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, American Urological Association, Association of Medical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases-Canada, and the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine. The focus of this work is treatment of women with acute uncomplicated cystitis and pyelonephritis, diagnoses limited in these guidelines to premenopausal, non-pregnant women with no known urological abnormalities or co-morbidities. The issues of in vitro resistance prevalence and the ecological adverse effects of antimicrobial therapy (collateral damage) were considered as important factors in making optimal treatment choices and thus are reflected in the rankings of recommendations.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Urinary tract infection syndromes: occurrence, recurrence, bacteriology, risk factors, and disease burden.

              Urinary tract infection (UTI) is one of the most common bacterial infections, accounting for 0.9% of all ambulatory visits in the United States. This review defines the major UTI syndromes, their occurrence and recurrence, bacteriology, risk factors, and disease burden. Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Antibiotics (Basel)
                Antibiotics (Basel)
                antibiotics
                Antibiotics
                MDPI
                2079-6382
                25 August 2020
                September 2020
                : 9
                : 9
                : 536
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Department of Family and Community Medicine, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX 77030, USA; george@ 123456germanos.md (G.G.); roger.zoorob@ 123456bcm.edu (R.Z.); jsalemi@ 123456usf.edu (J.S.); fareed.khan@ 123456bcm.edu (F.K.); grigorya@ 123456bcm.edu (L.G.)
                [2 ]Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX 77030, USA; patrick.light@ 123456bcm.edu
                [3 ]Section of Infectious Diseases, Department of Medicine, Boston Veterans Affairs Healthcare System and Boston University School of Medicine, Boston, MA 02118, USA; kalpana.gupta@ 123456va.gov
                [4 ]Houston VA Center for Innovations in Quality, Effectiveness and Safety (IQuESt), Michael E. DeBakey Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Houston, TX 77030, USA; trautner@ 123456bcm.edu
                [5 ]Section of Infectious Diseases, Departments of Medicine and Surgery, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX 77030, USA
                Author notes
                [* ]Correspondence: mahansen@ 123456bcm.edu ; Tel.: +1-(713)-798-0114
                Author information
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0077-6023
                Article
                antibiotics-09-00536
                10.3390/antibiotics9090536
                7558992
                32854205
                e07f83cb-584a-4f4e-ae1e-aea3be73c723
                © 2020 by the authors.

                Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

                History
                : 21 July 2020
                : 24 August 2020
                Categories
                Article

                validation,icd,urinary tract infection,outpatient,cystitis,ppv
                validation, icd, urinary tract infection, outpatient, cystitis, ppv

                Comments

                Comment on this article