Surveillance for Clostridium difficile Infection: ICD-9 Coding Has Poor Sensitivity Compared to Laboratory Diagnosis in Hospital Patients, Singapore
Open Access
- 20 January 2011
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Public Library of Science (PLoS) in PLOS ONE
- Vol. 6 (1), e15603
- https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0015603
Abstract
Clostridium difficile infection (CDI) is an increasingly recognized nosocomial infection in Singapore. Surveillance methods include laboratory reporting of Clostridium difficile toxin assays (CDTA) or use of International Classification of Diseases, 9th Revision (ICD-9) discharge code 008.45. Previous US studies showed good correlation between CDTA and ICD-9 codes. However, the use of ICD-9 codes for CDI surveillance has not been validated in other healthcare settings. We compared CDI rates based on CDTA to ICD-9 codes for all discharges in 2007 from our hospital to determine sensitivity and specificity of ICD-9 codes. Demographic and hospitalization data were analyzed to determine predictors for missing ICD-9 codes. During 2007, there were 56,352 discharges. Of these, 268 tested CDTA-positive but only 133 were assigned the CDI ICD-9 code. A total of 141 discharges had the ICD-9 code; 8 were CDTA-negative, the rest were CDTA-positive. Community-acquired CDI accounted for only 3.2% of cases. The sensitivity and specificity of ICD-9 codes compared to CDTA were 49.6% and 100% respectively. Concordance between CDTA and ICD-9 codes was 0.649 (p<.001). Comparing concordant patients (CDTA+/ICD9+) to discordant patients (CDTA+/ICD9−), concordant patients were more likely to be over 50 years of age (OR 3.49, 95% CI 1.66–7.34, p = .001) and have shorter time from admission to testing (OR 0.98, 95% CI 0.97–0.99, p = .009). Unlike previous studies in the US, ICD-9 codes substantially underestimate CDI in Singapore compared to microbiological data. Older patients with shorter time to testing were less likely to have missing ICD-9 codes.Keywords
This publication has 14 references indexed in Scilit:
- Clinical Practice Guidelines for Clostridium difficile Infection in Adults: 2010 Update by the Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America (SHEA) and the Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA)Infection Control & Hospital Epidemiology, 2010
- Clostridium difficileInfections among Hospitalized Children, United States, 1997–2006Emerging Infectious Diseases, 2010
- Multicenter Study of Surveillance for Hospital-Onset Clostridium difficile Infection by the Use of ICD-9-CM Diagnosis CodesInfection Control & Hospital Epidemiology, 2010
- Comparison of Three Commercial Methods for Rapid Detection of Clostridium difficile Toxins A and B from Fecal SpecimensJournal of Clinical Microbiology, 2008
- Increasing Incidence ofClostridium difficile-associated Disease, SingaporeEmerging Infectious Diseases, 2008
- Diagnosis-dependent misclassification of infections using administrative data variably affected incidence and mortality estimates in ICU patientsJournal of Clinical Epidemiology, 2007
- Recommendations for Surveillance of Clostridium difficile–Associated DiseaseInfection Control & Hospital Epidemiology, 2007
- Accuracy of ICD-9 coding for Clostridium difficile infections: a retrospective cohortEpidemiology and Infection, 2006
- ICD-9 Codes and Surveillance for Clostridium difficile–associated DiseaseEmerging Infectious Diseases, 2006
- Computer-Assisted Surveillance for Detecting Clonal Outbreaks of Nosocomial InfectionJournal of Clinical Microbiology, 2004