If you need an accessible version of this item please contact JSTOR User Support

Multicenter Study of Surveillance for Hospital‐Onset Clostridium difficile Infection by the Use of ICD‐9‐CM Diagnosis Codes

Erik R. Dubberke , MD, Anne M. Butler , MS, Deborah S. Yokoe , MD, MPH, Jeanmarie Mayer , MD, Bala Hota , MD, MPH, Julie E. Mangino , MD, Yosef M. Khan , MD, Kyle J. Popovich , MD, Kurt B. Stevenson , MD, MPH, L. Clifford McDonald , MD, Margaret A. Olsen , PhD, MPH, Victoria J. Fraser , MD and Prevention Epicenters Program of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
Infection Control and Hospital Epidemiology
Vol. 31, No. 3 (March 2010), pp. 262-268
DOI: 10.1086/650447
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1086/650447
Page Count: 7
  • Download PDF
  • Cite this Item

You are not currently logged in.

Access your personal account or get JSTOR access through your library or other institution:

login

Log in to your personal account or through your institution.

If you need an accessible version of this item please contact JSTOR User Support
Multicenter Study of Surveillance for Hospital‐Onset Clostridium difficile Infection by the Use of ICD‐9‐CM Diagnosis Codes
Preview not available

Abstract

Objective.  To compare incidence of hospital‐onset Clostridium difficile infection (CDI) measured by the use of International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification (ICD‐9‐CM) discharge diagnosis codes with rates measured by the use of electronically available C. difficile toxin assay results. Methods.  Cases of hospital‐onset CDI were identified at 5 US hospitals during the period from July 2000 through June 2006 with the use of 2 surveillance definitions: positive toxin assay results (gold standard) and secondary ICD‐9‐CM discharge diagnosis codes for CDI. The χ2 test was used to compare incidence, linear regression models were used to analyze trends, and the test of equality was used to compare slopes. Results.  Of 8,670 cases of hospital‐onset CDI, 38% were identified by the use of both toxin assay results and the ICD‐9‐CM code, 16% by the use of toxin assay results alone, and 45% by the use of the ICD‐9‐CM code alone. Nearly half (47%) of cases of CDI identified by the use of a secondary diagnosis code alone were community‐onset CDI according to the results of the toxin assay. The rate of hospital‐onset CDI found by use of ICD‐9‐CM codes was significantly higher than the rate found by use of toxin assay results overall ( \documentclass{aastex} \usepackage{amsbsy} \usepackage{amsfonts} \usepackage{amssymb} \usepackage{bm} \usepackage{mathrsfs} \usepackage{pifont} \usepackage{stmaryrd} \usepackage{textcomp} \usepackage{portland,xspace} \usepackage{amsmath,amsxtra} \usepackage[OT2,OT1]{fontenc} \newcommand\cyr{ \renewcommand\rmdefault{wncyr} \renewcommand\sfdefault{wncyss} \renewcommand\encodingdefault{OT2} \normalfont \selectfont} \DeclareTextFontCommand{\textcyr}{\cyr} \pagestyle{empty} \DeclareMathSizes{10}{9}{7}{6} \begin{document} \landscape $P< .001$ \end{document} ), as well as individually at 3 of the 5 hospitals ( \documentclass{aastex} \usepackage{amsbsy} \usepackage{amsfonts} \usepackage{amssymb} \usepackage{bm} \usepackage{mathrsfs} \usepackage{pifont} \usepackage{stmaryrd} \usepackage{textcomp} \usepackage{portland,xspace} \usepackage{amsmath,amsxtra} \usepackage[OT2,OT1]{fontenc} \newcommand\cyr{ \renewcommand\rmdefault{wncyr} \renewcommand\sfdefault{wncyss} \renewcommand\encodingdefault{OT2} \normalfont \selectfont} \DeclareTextFontCommand{\textcyr}{\cyr} \pagestyle{empty} \DeclareMathSizes{10}{9}{7}{6} \begin{document} \landscape $P< .001$ \end{document} for all). The agreement between toxin assay results and the presence of a secondary ICD‐9‐CM diagnosis code for CDI was moderate, with an overall κ value of 0.509 and hospital‐specific κ values of 0.489–0.570. Overall, the annual increase in CDI incidence was significantly greater for rates determined by the use of ICD‐9‐CM codes than for rates determined by the use of toxin assay results ( \documentclass{aastex} \usepackage{amsbsy} \usepackage{amsfonts} \usepackage{amssymb} \usepackage{bm} \usepackage{mathrsfs} \usepackage{pifont} \usepackage{stmaryrd} \usepackage{textcomp} \usepackage{portland,xspace} \usepackage{amsmath,amsxtra} \usepackage[OT2,OT1]{fontenc} \newcommand\cyr{ \renewcommand\rmdefault{wncyr} \renewcommand\sfdefault{wncyss} \renewcommand\encodingdefault{OT2} \normalfont \selectfont} \DeclareTextFontCommand{\textcyr}{\cyr} \pagestyle{empty} \DeclareMathSizes{10}{9}{7}{6} \begin{document} \landscape $P=.006$ \end{document} ). Conclusions.  Although the ICD‐9‐CM code for CDI seems to be adequate for measuring the overall CDI burden, use of the ICD‐9‐CM discharge diagnosis code for CDI, without present‐on‐admission code assignment, is not an acceptable surrogate for surveillance for hospital‐onset CDI.

Page Thumbnails