Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2012 Mar;34(1):138-48.
doi: 10.1093/pubmed/fdr054. Epub 2011 Jul 27.

Systematic review of discharge coding accuracy

E M Burns  1 , E Rigby, R Mamidanna, A Bottle, P Aylin, P Ziprin, O D Faiz
Affiliations

Systematic review of discharge coding accuracy

E M Burns et al. J Public Health (Oxf). 2012 Mar.

Abstract

Introduction: Routinely collected data sets are increasingly used for research, financial reimbursement and health service planning. High quality data are necessary for reliable analysis. This study aims to assess the published accuracy of routinely collected data sets in Great Britain.

Methods: Systematic searches of the EMBASE, PUBMED, OVID and Cochrane databases were performed from 1989 to present using defined search terms. Included studies were those that compared routinely collected data sets with case or operative note review and those that compared routinely collected data with clinical registries.

Results: Thirty-two studies were included. Twenty-five studies compared routinely collected data with case or operation notes. Seven studies compared routinely collected data with clinical registries. The overall median accuracy (routinely collected data sets versus case notes) was 83.2% (IQR: 67.3-92.1%). The median diagnostic accuracy was 80.3% (IQR: 63.3-94.1%) with a median procedure accuracy of 84.2% (IQR: 68.7-88.7%). There was considerable variation in accuracy rates between studies (50.5-97.8%). Since the 2002 introduction of Payment by Results, accuracy has improved in some respects, for example primary diagnoses accuracy has improved from 73.8% (IQR: 59.3-92.1%) to 96.0% (IQR: 89.3-96.3), P= 0.020.

Conclusion: Accuracy rates are improving. Current levels of reported accuracy suggest that routinely collected data are sufficiently robust to support their use for research and managerial decision-making.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Schematic of inclusion following literature search.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. World Health Organization. International Classification of Diseases (ICD) http://www.who.int/classifications/icd/en/ May 2011, date last accessed.
    1. Connecting for Health. OPCS-4 Classification. http://www.connectingforhealth.nhs.uk/systemsandservices/data/clinicalco.... May 2011, date last accessed.
    1. Campbell SE, Campbell MK, Grimshaw JM, et al. A systematic review of discharge coding accuracy. J Public Health Med. 2001;23(3):205–11. doi:10.1093/pubmed/23.3.205. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Audit Commission. PbR data assurance framework 2007/08. http://www.audit-commission.gov.uk/SiteCollectionDocuments/AuditCommissi.... May 2011, date last accessed.
    1. Department of Health. The operating framework for the NHS in England 2008/09. 2007. http://www.dh.gov.uk/prod_consum_dh/groups/dh_digitalassets/dh/en/docume.... May 2011, date last accessed.

Publication types

MeSH terms