Key result
Medicare claims for MI in any discharge position showed a high positive predictive value of 84.3% but low sensitivity of 49.0% compared to adjudicated MI.
Why the study?
Do Medicare claims accurately identify myocardial infarction compared to adjudicated study procedures in Medicare beneficiaries?
Observational (n=9,951)
Yes
Do Medicare claims accurately identify myocardial infarction compared to adjudicated study procedures in Medicare beneficiaries?
Medicare claims data has high positive predictive value but low sensitivity for identifying myocardial infarction, though it yields similar hazard ratios for associated characteristics as adjudicated events.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Claims data under-ascertain MI incidence due to low sensitivity; leaves open their validity for precise event rates in observational research.
OBJECTIVES: Assess the validity of Medicare claims for identifying myocardial infarction (MI). METHODS: We used data from 9951 Medicare beneficiaries 65 years and above in the Reasons for Geographic And Racial Differences in Stroke study. Between 2003 and 2012, 669 participants had an MI identified and adjudicated through study procedures (ie, the gold standard), and 552 had an overnight inpatient claim with a code for MI (ICD-9 code 410.x0 or 410.x1) in any discharge diagnosis position. RESULTS: Using Medicare claims with a discharge diagnosis code for MI in any position, the positive predictive value (PPV) was 84.3% [95% confidence interval (CI), 80.9%-87.3%] and the sensitivity was 49.0% (95% CI, 44.9%-53.1%). Sensitivity was lower for men (45.8%) versus women (55.1%), microsize MIs (13.7%) versus other MIs (64.7%), type 2 (30.9%), and 4-5 MIs (11.1%) versus type 1 MIs (76.6%), and MIs occurring in-hospital (28.8%) versus out-of-hospital (66.7%). Using Medicare claims with a code for MI in the primary discharge diagnosis position, the PPV was 89.7% (95% CI, 86.3%-92.5%) and sensitivity was 40.1% (95% CI, 36.1%-44.2%). The sensitivity of claims with a code for MI in the primary discharge diagnosis position was lower for microsize versus other MIs, type 2 and 4-5 MIs versus type 1 MIs and MIs occurring in-hospital versus out-of-hospital. Hazard ratios for MI associated with participant characteristics were similar using adjudicated MIs identified through study procedures or claims for MI without further adjudication. CONCLUSIONS: Medicare claims have a high PPV but low sensitivity for identifying MI and can be used to investigate individual-level characteristics associated with MI.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Colantonio et al. (2018) conducted an observational in Myocardial infarction (n=9,951). Medicare claims data vs. Adjudicated MI (gold standard) was evaluated on Positive predictive value of Medicare claims for MI in any discharge diagnosis position (95% CI 80.9-87.3). Medicare claims for MI in any discharge position showed a high positive predictive value of 84.3% but low sensitivity of 49.0% compared to adjudicated MI.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: