Validity of gout diagnoses in administrative data

Leslie R. Harrold, Kenneth G. Saag, Robert A. Yood, Ted R Mikuls, Susan E. Andrade, Hassan Fouayzi, Judith Davis, K. Arnold Chan, Marsha A. Raebel, Ann Von Worley, Richard Platt

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

66 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Objective. To determine the utility of using administrative data for epidemiologic studies of gout by examining the validity of gout diagnoses in claims data. Methods. From a population of ∼800,000 members from 4 managed care plans, we identified patients who had at least 2 ambulatory claims for a diagnosis of gout between January 1, 1999 and December 31, 2003. From this group, a random sample of 200 patients was chosen for medical record review. Trained medical record reviewers abstracted gout-related clinical, laboratory, and radiologie data from the medical records. Two rheumatologists independently evaluated the abstracted information and assessed whether the gout diagnosis was probable/definite or unlikely/insufficient information. Discordant physician ratings were adjudicated by consensus. Based on record reviews, patients were also classified according to the American College of Rheumatology (ACR), Rome, and New York gout criteria and these results were compared with the physician global assessments. Results. There were 121 patients rated as having probable/definite gout by physician consensus, leading to a positive predictive value of ≥2 coded diagnoses of gout of 61% (95% confidence interval 53-67). There was low concordance between physician assessments and established gout criteria including ACR, Rome, and New York criteria (κ = 0.17, 0.16, and 0.20, respectively). Conclusion. Use of administrative data alone in epidemiologic and health services research on gout may lead to misclassification. Medical record reviews for validation of claims data may provide an inadequate gold standard to confirm gout diagnoses.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)103-108
Number of pages6
JournalArthritis Care and Research
Volume57
Issue number1
DOIs
StatePublished - Feb 15 2007

Fingerprint

Gout
Medical Records
Physicians
Insurance Claim Review
Health Services Research
Rheumatology
Managed Care Programs
Epidemiologic Studies
Confidence Intervals

Keywords

  • Administrative data
  • Gout
  • Validity

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Rheumatology

Cite this

Harrold, L. R., Saag, K. G., Yood, R. A., Mikuls, T. R., Andrade, S. E., Fouayzi, H., ... Platt, R. (2007). Validity of gout diagnoses in administrative data. Arthritis Care and Research, 57(1), 103-108. https://doi.org/10.1002/art.22474

Validity of gout diagnoses in administrative data. / Harrold, Leslie R.; Saag, Kenneth G.; Yood, Robert A.; Mikuls, Ted R; Andrade, Susan E.; Fouayzi, Hassan; Davis, Judith; Chan, K. Arnold; Raebel, Marsha A.; Von Worley, Ann; Platt, Richard.

In: Arthritis Care and Research, Vol. 57, No. 1, 15.02.2007, p. 103-108.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Harrold, LR, Saag, KG, Yood, RA, Mikuls, TR, Andrade, SE, Fouayzi, H, Davis, J, Chan, KA, Raebel, MA, Von Worley, A & Platt, R 2007, 'Validity of gout diagnoses in administrative data', Arthritis Care and Research, vol. 57, no. 1, pp. 103-108. https://doi.org/10.1002/art.22474
Harrold LR, Saag KG, Yood RA, Mikuls TR, Andrade SE, Fouayzi H et al. Validity of gout diagnoses in administrative data. Arthritis Care and Research. 2007 Feb 15;57(1):103-108. https://doi.org/10.1002/art.22474
Harrold, Leslie R. ; Saag, Kenneth G. ; Yood, Robert A. ; Mikuls, Ted R ; Andrade, Susan E. ; Fouayzi, Hassan ; Davis, Judith ; Chan, K. Arnold ; Raebel, Marsha A. ; Von Worley, Ann ; Platt, Richard. / Validity of gout diagnoses in administrative data. In: Arthritis Care and Research. 2007 ; Vol. 57, No. 1. pp. 103-108.
@article{a396e583438246bbb061cd9b5321a001,
title = "Validity of gout diagnoses in administrative data",
abstract = "Objective. To determine the utility of using administrative data for epidemiologic studies of gout by examining the validity of gout diagnoses in claims data. Methods. From a population of ∼800,000 members from 4 managed care plans, we identified patients who had at least 2 ambulatory claims for a diagnosis of gout between January 1, 1999 and December 31, 2003. From this group, a random sample of 200 patients was chosen for medical record review. Trained medical record reviewers abstracted gout-related clinical, laboratory, and radiologie data from the medical records. Two rheumatologists independently evaluated the abstracted information and assessed whether the gout diagnosis was probable/definite or unlikely/insufficient information. Discordant physician ratings were adjudicated by consensus. Based on record reviews, patients were also classified according to the American College of Rheumatology (ACR), Rome, and New York gout criteria and these results were compared with the physician global assessments. Results. There were 121 patients rated as having probable/definite gout by physician consensus, leading to a positive predictive value of ≥2 coded diagnoses of gout of 61{\%} (95{\%} confidence interval 53-67). There was low concordance between physician assessments and established gout criteria including ACR, Rome, and New York criteria (κ = 0.17, 0.16, and 0.20, respectively). Conclusion. Use of administrative data alone in epidemiologic and health services research on gout may lead to misclassification. Medical record reviews for validation of claims data may provide an inadequate gold standard to confirm gout diagnoses.",
keywords = "Administrative data, Gout, Validity",
author = "Harrold, {Leslie R.} and Saag, {Kenneth G.} and Yood, {Robert A.} and Mikuls, {Ted R} and Andrade, {Susan E.} and Hassan Fouayzi and Judith Davis and Chan, {K. Arnold} and Raebel, {Marsha A.} and {Von Worley}, Ann and Richard Platt",
year = "2007",
month = "2",
day = "15",
doi = "10.1002/art.22474",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "57",
pages = "103--108",
journal = "Arthritis and Rheumatism",
issn = "2151-4658",
publisher = "John Wiley and Sons Inc.",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Validity of gout diagnoses in administrative data

AU - Harrold, Leslie R.

AU - Saag, Kenneth G.

AU - Yood, Robert A.

AU - Mikuls, Ted R

AU - Andrade, Susan E.

AU - Fouayzi, Hassan

AU - Davis, Judith

AU - Chan, K. Arnold

AU - Raebel, Marsha A.

AU - Von Worley, Ann

AU - Platt, Richard

PY - 2007/2/15

Y1 - 2007/2/15

N2 - Objective. To determine the utility of using administrative data for epidemiologic studies of gout by examining the validity of gout diagnoses in claims data. Methods. From a population of ∼800,000 members from 4 managed care plans, we identified patients who had at least 2 ambulatory claims for a diagnosis of gout between January 1, 1999 and December 31, 2003. From this group, a random sample of 200 patients was chosen for medical record review. Trained medical record reviewers abstracted gout-related clinical, laboratory, and radiologie data from the medical records. Two rheumatologists independently evaluated the abstracted information and assessed whether the gout diagnosis was probable/definite or unlikely/insufficient information. Discordant physician ratings were adjudicated by consensus. Based on record reviews, patients were also classified according to the American College of Rheumatology (ACR), Rome, and New York gout criteria and these results were compared with the physician global assessments. Results. There were 121 patients rated as having probable/definite gout by physician consensus, leading to a positive predictive value of ≥2 coded diagnoses of gout of 61% (95% confidence interval 53-67). There was low concordance between physician assessments and established gout criteria including ACR, Rome, and New York criteria (κ = 0.17, 0.16, and 0.20, respectively). Conclusion. Use of administrative data alone in epidemiologic and health services research on gout may lead to misclassification. Medical record reviews for validation of claims data may provide an inadequate gold standard to confirm gout diagnoses.

AB - Objective. To determine the utility of using administrative data for epidemiologic studies of gout by examining the validity of gout diagnoses in claims data. Methods. From a population of ∼800,000 members from 4 managed care plans, we identified patients who had at least 2 ambulatory claims for a diagnosis of gout between January 1, 1999 and December 31, 2003. From this group, a random sample of 200 patients was chosen for medical record review. Trained medical record reviewers abstracted gout-related clinical, laboratory, and radiologie data from the medical records. Two rheumatologists independently evaluated the abstracted information and assessed whether the gout diagnosis was probable/definite or unlikely/insufficient information. Discordant physician ratings were adjudicated by consensus. Based on record reviews, patients were also classified according to the American College of Rheumatology (ACR), Rome, and New York gout criteria and these results were compared with the physician global assessments. Results. There were 121 patients rated as having probable/definite gout by physician consensus, leading to a positive predictive value of ≥2 coded diagnoses of gout of 61% (95% confidence interval 53-67). There was low concordance between physician assessments and established gout criteria including ACR, Rome, and New York criteria (κ = 0.17, 0.16, and 0.20, respectively). Conclusion. Use of administrative data alone in epidemiologic and health services research on gout may lead to misclassification. Medical record reviews for validation of claims data may provide an inadequate gold standard to confirm gout diagnoses.

KW - Administrative data

KW - Gout

KW - Validity

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=33846974015&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=33846974015&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1002/art.22474

DO - 10.1002/art.22474

M3 - Article

VL - 57

SP - 103

EP - 108

JO - Arthritis and Rheumatism

JF - Arthritis and Rheumatism

SN - 2151-4658

IS - 1

ER -