↓ Skip to main content

Accuracy of co-morbidity data in patients undergoing abdominal wall hernia repair: a retrospective study

Overview of attention for article published in Hernia, December 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Readers on

mendeley
34 Mendeley
Title
Accuracy of co-morbidity data in patients undergoing abdominal wall hernia repair: a retrospective study
Published in
Hernia, December 2017
DOI 10.1007/s10029-017-1713-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

S. Hajibandeh, S. Hajibandeh, R. Deering, D. McEleney, J. Guirguis, S. Dix, A. Sreh, E. Toner, A. El Muntasar, A. Kausar, G. Sheikh, D. OShea, A. Shafiq, A. Kelly, A. Khan, D. Arumugam, A. Evans

Abstract

To determine the baseline accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV) of routinely collected co-morbidity data in patients undergoing abdominal wall hernia repair. All patients aged > 18 who underwent umbilical, para-umbilical, inguinal or incisional hernia repair between 1 January 2015 and 1 November 2016 were identified. All parts of the clinical notes were searched for co-morbidities by two authors independently. The following co-morbidities were considered: hypertension, ischaemic heart disease (IHD), diabetes, asthma, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), cerebrovascular disease (CVD), chronic kidney disease (CKD), hypercholesterolemia, obesity and smoking. The co-morbidities data from clinical notes were compared with corresponding data in hospital episode statistics (HES) database to calculate accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, PPV and NPV of HES codes for co-morbidities. To assess the agreement between clinical notes and HES data, we also calculated Cohen's Kappa index value as a more robust measure of agreement. Overall, 346 patients comprising 3460 co-morbidity codes were included in the study. The overall accuracy of HES codes for all co-morbidities was 77% (Kappa: 0.13). When calculated separately for each co-morbidity, the accuracy was 72% (Kappa: 0.113) for hypertension, 82% (Kappa: 0.232) for IHD, 85% (Kappa: 0.203) for diabetes, 86% (Kappa: 0.287) for asthma, 91% (Kappa: 0.339) for COPD, 92% (Kappa: 0.374) for CVD, 94% (Kappa: 0.424) for CKD, 74% (Kappa: 0.074) for hypercholesterolemia, 71% (Kappa: 0.66) for obesity and 24% (Kappa: 0.005) for smoking. The overall sensitivity, specificity, PPV and NPV of HES codes were 9, 100, 100, and 77%, respectively. The results were consistent when individual co-morbidities were analyzed separately. Our results demonstrated that HES co-morbidity codes in patients undergoing abdominal wall hernia repair are specific with good positive predictive value; however, they have substandard accuracy, sensitivity, and negative predictive value. The presence of a relatively large number of false negative or missed cases in HES database explains our findings. Better documentation of co-morbidities in admission clerking proforma may help to improve the quality of source documents for coders, which in turn may improve the accuracy of coding.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 34 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 34 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 6 18%
Researcher 5 15%
Other 4 12%
Student > Postgraduate 2 6%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 6%
Other 4 12%
Unknown 11 32%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 11 32%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 9%
Mathematics 1 3%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 3%
Psychology 1 3%
Other 3 9%
Unknown 14 41%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 16 December 2017.
All research outputs
#20,456,235
of 23,012,811 outputs
Outputs from Hernia
#905
of 1,118 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#374,712
of 439,309 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Hernia
#20
of 34 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,012,811 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,118 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.3. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 439,309 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 34 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.