Clinical Epidemiology (Mar 2017)

Positive predictive values of International Classification of Diseases, 10th revision codes for dermatologic events and hypersensitivity leading to hospitalization or emergency room visit among women with postmenopausal osteoporosis in the Danish and Swedish national patient registries

  • Adelborg K,
  • Christensen LB,
  • Munch T,
  • Kahlert J,
  • Trolle Lagerros Y,
  • Tell GS,
  • Apalset EM,
  • Xue F,
  • Ehrenstein V

Journal volume & issue
Vol. Volume 9
pp. 179 – 184

Abstract

Read online

Kasper Adelborg,1 Lotte Brix Christensen,1 Troels Munch,1 Johnny Kahlert,1 Ylva Trolle Lagerros,2,3 Grethe S Tell,4 Ellen M Apalset,4,5 Fei Xue,6 Vera Ehrenstein1 1Department of Clinical Epidemiology, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus N, Denmark; 2Department of Medicine, Clinical Epidemiology Unit, Karolinska Institutet, 3Department of Medicine, Clinic of Endocrinology, Metabolism and Diabetes, Karolinska University Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden; 4Department of Global Public Health and Primary Care, University of Bergen, 5Department of Rheumatology, Haukeland University Hospital, Bergen, Norway; 6Center for Observational Research, Amgen Inc. Thousand Oaks, CA, USA Background: Clinical epidemiology research studies, including pharmacoepidemiology and pharmacovigilance studies, use routinely collected health data, such as diagnoses recorded in national health and administrative registries, to assess clinical effectiveness and safety of treatments. We estimated positive predictive values (PPVs) of International Classification of Diseases, 10th revision (ICD-10) codes for primary diagnoses of dermatologic events and hypersensitivity recorded at hospitalization or emergency room visit in the national patient registries of Denmark and Sweden among women with postmenopausal osteoporosis (PMO). Methods: This validation study included women with PMO identified from the Danish and Swedish national patient registries (2005–2014). Medical charts of the potential cases served as the gold standard for the diagnosis confirmation and were reviewed and adjudicated by physicians. Results: We obtained and reviewed 189 of 221 sampled medical records (86%). The overall PPV was 92.4% (95% confidence interval [CI], 85.1%–96.3%) for dermatologic events, while the PPVs for bullous events and erythematous dermatologic events were 52.5% (95% CI, 37.5%–67.1%) and 12.5% (95% CI, 2.2%–47.1%), respectively. The PPV was 59.0% (95% CI, 48.3%–69.0%) for hypersensitivity; however, the PPV of hypersensitivity increased to 100.0% (95% CI, 67.6%–100.0%) when restricting to diagnostic codes for anaphylaxis. The overall results did not vary by country. Conclusion: Among women with PMO, the PPV for any dermatologic event recorded as the primary diagnosis at hospitalization or at an emergency room visit was high and acceptable for epidemiologic research in the Danish and Swedish national patient registries. The PPV was substantially lower for hypersensitivity leading to hospitalization or emergency room visit. Keywords: dermatology, positive predictive value, validation, pharmacoepidemiology

Keywords