PS3-11: Beyond General Equivalency Mappings (GEMs): Understanding the Implications of ICD 10 in Research
TL;DR: ICD 10 offers a finer level of detail and a higher level of specificity, thereby allowing research teams to be more targeted when pulling data, and research teams need to exercise caution when using GEMs and other tools to translate ICD 9 codes into ICD 10 codes and vice versa.
Abstract: Background/Aims
With the implementation of ICD 10 CM and ICD 10 PCS less than two years away, there are still unanswered questions as to how research teams will effectively translate or use ICD 10 codes in research. Approximately 84% of the ICD 10 codes have only approximate matches with 10% having multiple matches and only 5% have exact one-to-one matches between ICD 9 and ICD 10. With the number of codes increasing five-fold, this offers additional opportunities and risks when pulling data.
Citations
More filters
TL;DR: This work provides the first report of substantial hospital safety reporting errors with five direct comparisons from the 23 types of PSIs (transfusion and anesthesia related PSIs), and investigates which PSIs would reliably transition between ICD-9-CM and I CDD-10-CM, and those at risk of under-reporting and over-reporting adverse events while the frequency of these adverse events remain unchanged.
19 citations
TL;DR: A web portal tool and translation tables to list all I CD-9-CM diagnosis codes related to the specific input of ICD-10- CM diagnosis codes and their level of complexity and guidance on ambiguous and complex translations to reveal where reports or analyses may be challenging to impossible.
17 citations