ArticleResuscitation plus2023
Validation of ICD-10 codes for studying foreign body airway obstructions: A health administrative data cohort study.
Article in Resuscitation plus, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Aim: To validate a case definition for foreign body airway obstructions (FBAO) using International Classification of Diseases version 10 (ICD-10) codes to accurately identify patients in administrative health databases and improve reporting on this injury. Methods: We identified prehospital patient encounters in Alberta, Canada between Jan 1, 2018 and Dec 31, 2021 by querying the provincial emergency medical services' (EMS) patient care records for FBAO-related presentations, EMS protocols, or treatments. We deterministically linked EMS patient encounters to data on emergency department visits and hospital admissions, which included ICD-10 codes. Two physicians independently reviewed encounters to determine true FBAO cases. We then calculated diagnostic accuracy measures (sensitivity, specificity, likelihood ratios) of various algorithms. Results: We identified 3677 EMS patient encounters, 2121 were linked to hospital administrative databases. Of these encounters, 825 (38.9%) were true FBAO. The combination of two ICD-10 codes (T17 = foreign body in the respiratory tract or T18.0 = foreign body in the mouth) was the most specific algorithm (96.9% [95%CI 95.8-97.8%]), while the combination of all FBAO-related ICD-10 codes and R06.8 (other breathing abnormalities) was the most sensitive (75.0% [95%CI 71.9-78.0]). We identified an additional 453 (35.4%) FBAO cases not transported by EMS (due to death or transport refusal), and therefore not linked to the hospital administrative databases. Of these unlinked encounters, 44 (9.7%) cases resulted in the patient's death. Conclusions: FBAO can be identified with reasonable accuracy using health administrative data and ICD-10 codes. All algorithms had a trade-off between sensitivity and specificity, and failed to identify a third of FBAO cases, of which 10% resulted in death.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.