Validation of the diagnosis of venous thromboembolism in general practice database studies.

AIMS The study was conducted to determine whether the method for selecting cases of venous thromboembolism (VTE) from general practice databases significantly affected the findings of an epidemiological study. METHODS Cases of VTE were identified from the UK General Practice Research Database (GPRD) by searching for codes for deep vein thrombosis (DVT) and pulmonary embolism (PE). These had to be supported by evidence of anticoagulation and be exposed to a combined oral contraceptive (COC) at the time of the event. Additional information about the event was sought from general practitioners who were requested to complete a questionnaire and to supply anonymised copies of hospital letters and discharge summaries. RESULTS Of the 285 cases identified from the GPRD, additional information was available for 177 VTE events. This information showed that 84% of those events were supported by hospital investigations or a death certificate. Using only verified cases, rather than all GPRD identified events, did not alter the results of the epidemiological study. CONCLUSIONS The GPRD provides information of sufficiently high quality to allow valid epidemiological research of VTE events. Excluding cases without a database record of hospital admission would lead to valid events being overlooked, and an under-estimate of the disease incidence.

[1]  H. Jick,et al.  Risk of idiopathic cardiovascular death and rionfatal venous thromboembolism in women using oral contraceptives with differing progestagen components , 1995, The Lancet.

[2]  J. Vandenbroucke,et al.  Third-generation oral contraceptives and venous thrombosis , 1997, The Lancet.

[3]  L. Abenhaim,et al.  The quality of information recorded on a UK database of primary care records: A study of hospitalizations due to hypoglycemia and other conditions , 1994 .

[4]  W. Spitzer,et al.  Third generation oral contraceptives and risk of venous thromboembolic disorders: an international case-control study , 1996, BMJ.

[5]  H Jick,et al.  Validation of information recorded on general practitioner based computerised data resource in the United Kingdom. , 1991, BMJ.

[6]  T. Farley,et al.  Venous thromboembolic disease and combined oral contraceptives: results of international multicentre case-control study. World Health Organization Collaborative Study of Cardiovascular Disease and Steroid Hormone Contraception. , 1995, Lancet.

[7]  R D Farmer,et al.  A comparison of the risks of venous thromboembolic disease in association with different combined oral contraceptives. , 2000, British journal of clinical pharmacology.

[8]  M. Marmot,et al.  Third-generation oral contraceptives and venous thrombosis , 1997, The Lancet.

[9]  World Health Organization Collaborative Study of Cardiov Contarception.  Venous thromboembolic disease and combined oral contraceptives: results of international multicentre case-control study , 1995, The Lancet.

[10]  R. Farmer,et al.  Population-based study of risk of venous thromboembolism associated with various oral contraceptives , 1997, The Lancet.

[11]  J. Evans,et al.  Misclassification and selection bias in case–control studies using an automated database , 1997, Pharmacoepidemiology and drug safety.