Validity of type 2 diabetes diagnosis in a population-based electronic health record database

BackgroundThe increasing burden of type 2 diabetes mellitus makes the continuous surveillance of its prevalence and incidence advisable. Electronic health records (EHRs) have great potential for research and surveillance purposes; however the quality of their data must first be evaluated for fitness for use. The aim of this study was to assess the validity of type 2 diabetes diagnosis in a primary care EHR database covering more than half a million inhabitants, 97% of the population in Navarra, Spain.MethodsIn the Navarra EPIC-InterAct study, the validity of the T90 code from the International Classification of Primary Care, Second Edition was studied in a primary care EHR database to identify incident cases of type 2 diabetes, using a multi-source approach as the gold standard. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value and the kappa index were calculated. Additionally, type 2 diabetes prevalence from the EHR database was compared with estimations from a health survey.ResultsThe sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value and negative predictive value of incident type 2 diabetes recorded in the EHRs were 98.2, 99.3, 92.2 and 99.8%, respectively, and the kappa index was 0.946. Overall prevalence of type 2 diabetes diagnosed in the EHRs among adults (35–84 years of age) was 7.2% (95% confidence interval [CI] 7.2–7.3) in men and 5.9% (95% CI 5.8–5.9) in women, which was similar to the prevalence estimated from the health survey: 8.5% (95% CI 7.1–9.8) and 5.5% (95% CI 4.4–6.6) in men and women, respectively.ConclusionsThe high sensitivity and specificity of type 2 diabetes diagnosis found in the primary care EHRs make this database a good source for population-based surveillance of incident and prevalent type 2 diabetes, as well as for monitoring quality of care and health outcomes in diabetic patients.

[1]  Warszawski Uniwersytet Medyczny,et al.  Diabetes care , 2019, Health at a Glance.

[2]  Vilmundur Gudnason,et al.  Diabetes Mellitus, Fasting Glucose, and Risk of Cause-Specific Death , 2011 .

[3]  Chunhua Weng,et al.  Methods and dimensions of electronic health record data quality assessment: enabling reuse for clinical research , 2013, J. Am. Medical Informatics Assoc..

[4]  E. Martı́nez-Vila,et al.  [Study of vascular risk in Navarre: objectives and design. Prevalence of metabolic syndrome and of vascular risk factors]. , 2007, Anales del sistema sanitario de Navarra.

[5]  P. Rose,et al.  Validity of diagnostic coding within the General Practice Research Database: a systematic review. , 2010, The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners.

[6]  J. Marrugat,et al.  Validity for use in research on vascular diseases of the SIDIAP (Information System for the Development of Research in Primary Care): the EMMA study. , 2012, Revista espanola de cardiologia.

[7]  The Emerging Risk Factors Collaboration.  Diabetes mellitus, fasting blood glucose concentration, and risk of vascular disease: a collaborative meta-analysis of 102 prospective studies , 2010, The Lancet.

[8]  Gretchen A. Piatt,et al.  Developing and validating a diabetes database in a large health system. , 2007, Diabetes research and clinical practice.

[9]  M. Woodward.  Use of national data sources in diabetes epidemiology. , 2015, The lancet. Diabetes & endocrinology.

[10]  J. A. Johnson,et al.  Validation of diabetes case definitions using administrative claims data , 2011, Diabetic medicine : a journal of the British Diabetic Association.

[11]  J. Díez,et al.  Estudio de riesgo vascular en Navarra: objetivos y diseño. Prevalencia del síndrome metabólico y de los factores mayores de riesgo vascular* , 2007 .

[12]  H. Quan,et al.  Validating ICD coding algorithms for diabetes mellitus from administrative data. , 2010, Diabetes research and clinical practice.

[13]  Elisa Gil Montalbán,et al.  [Validity and concordance of electronic health records in primary care (AP-Madrid) for surveillance of diabetes mellitus. PREDIMERC study]. , 2014, Gaceta sanitaria.

[14]  Isaac Subirana,et al.  Risk of Cause-Specific Death in Individuals With Diabetes: A Competing Risks Analysis , 2016, Diabetes Care.

[15]  A. Braillon.  European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition (EPIC): methods and clinical relevance. , 2011, The American journal of clinical nutrition.

[16]  M. Martínez-González,et al.  Prevalencia de obesidad y diabetes en adultos españoles, 1987-2012 , 2017 .

[17]  P. Raskin,et al.  Report of the expert committee on the diagnosis and classification of diabetes mellitus. , 1999, Diabetes care.

[18]  L. Smeeth,et al.  Validation and validity of diagnoses in the General Practice Research Database: a systematic review , 2010, British journal of clinical pharmacology.

[19]  D. Mauricio,et al.  Is diabetes mellitus correctly registered and classified in primary care? A population-based study in Catalonia, Spain. , 2016, Endocrinologia y nutricion : organo de la Sociedad Espanola de Endocrinologia y Nutricion.

[20]  T. To,et al.  Validation of a health administrative data algorithm for assessing the epidemiology of diabetes in Canadian children , 2010, Pediatric diabetes.

[21]  References , 1971 .

[22]  E GilMontalbán,et al.  [Validity and concordance of electronic health records in primary care (AP-Madrid) for surveillance of diabetes mellitus. PREDIMERC study]. , 2014 .

[23]  Claudio Rigatto,et al.  Validation of a Pediatric Diabetes Case Definition Using Administrative Health Data in Manitoba, Canada , 2011, Diabetes Care.

[24]  I. del Cura-González,et al.  Validation of diabetes mellitus and hypertension diagnosis in computerized medical records in primary health care , 2011, BMC medical research methodology.

[25]  M. Engelgau,et al.  Review of the performance of methods to identify diabetes cases among vital statistics, administrative, and survey data. , 2004, Annals of epidemiology.

[26]  N Slimani,et al.  Design and cohort description of the InterAct Project: an examination of the interaction of genetic and lifestyle factors on the incidence of type 2 diabetes in the EPIC Study , 2011, Diabetologia.

[27]  Janet E Hux,et al.  Diabetes in Ontario: determination of prevalence and incidence using a validated administrative data algorithm. , 2002, Diabetes care.

[28]  E Riboli,et al.  The EPIC Project: rationale and study design. European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition. , 1997, International journal of epidemiology.

[29]  Elisa Gil Montalbán,et al.  Validez y concordancia de la historia clínica electrónica de atención primaria (AP-Madrid) en la vigilancia epidemiológica de la diabetes mellitus: estudio PREDIMERC , 2014 .

[30]  I. Okkes,et al.  ICPC-2, International Classification of Primary Care, Second edition , 1998 .

[31]  N E Day,et al.  European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition (EPIC): study populations and data collection , 2002, Public Health Nutrition.

[32]  M. Fantone,et al.  Report of the Expert Committee on the Diagnosis and Classification of Diabetes Mellitus , 1997, Diabetes Care.

[33]  M. Grau,et al.  Validez del Sistema de Información para el Desarrollo de la Investigación en Atención Primaria (SIDIAP) en el estudio de enfermedades vasculares: estudio EMMA , 2012 .