Validity and reliability International Classification of Diseases-10 codes for all forms of injury: A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Intentional and unintentional injuries are a leading cause of death and disability globally. International Classification of Diseases (ICD), Tenth Revision (ICD-10) codes are used to classify injuries in administrative health data and are widely used for health care planning and delivery, research, and policy. However, a systematic review of their overall validity and reliability has not yet been done. OBJECTIVE: To conduct a systematic review of the validity and reliability of external cause injury ICD-10 codes. METHODS: MEDLINE, EMBASE, COCHRANE, and SCOPUS were searched (inception to April 2023) for validity and/or reliability studies of ICD-10 external cause injury codes in all countries for all ages. We examined all available data for external cause injuries and injuries related to specific body regions. Validity was defined by sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV). Reliability was defined by inter-rater reliability (IRR), measured by Krippendorff's alpha, Cohen's Kappa, and/or Fleiss' kappa. RESULTS: Twenty-seven published studies from 2006 to 2023 were included. Across all injuries, the mean outcome values and ranges were sensitivity: 61.6% (35.5%-96.0%), specificity: 91.6% (85.8%-100%), PPV: 74.9% (58.6%-96.5%), NPV: 80.2% (44.6%-94.4%), Cohen's kappa: 0.672 (0.480-0.928), Krippendorff's alpha: 0.453, and Fleiss' kappa: 0.630. Poisoning and hand and wrist injuries had higher mean sensitivity (84.4% and 96.0%, respectively), while self-harm and spinal cord injuries were lower (35.5% and 36.4%, respectively). Transport and pedestrian injuries and hand and wrist injuries had high PPVs (96.5% and 92.0%, respectively). Specificity and NPV were generally high, except for abuse (NPV 44.6%). CONCLUSIONS AND SIGNIFICANCE: The validity and reliability of ICD-10 external cause injury codes vary based on the injury types coded and the outcomes examined, and overall, they only perform moderately well. Future work, potentially utilizing artificial intelligence, may improve the validity and reliability of ICD codes used to document injuries.

Should nasogastric tube be used routinely in patients undergoing cardiac surgery? A narrative review.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Nasogastric tube (NGT) use has been common in the immediate postoperative period in surgical patients for decades. Potential advantages include the decompression of gastric contents and the early administration of time-sensitive medications. However, its routine use after cardiac surgery has not been established as a gold standard yet. The NGT use for prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting has been a matter of debate in literature. Also, NGT use has also been associated with the incidence of some respiratory and gastrointestinal complications and it may be a source of significant pain and discomfort to patients. In this article, we review the current available literature regarding the use of NGT during and immediately after cardiac surgery, with particular emphasis on its potential role in enhanced postoperative recovery. METHODS: We performed a database search in October 2021 using Embase, Cochrane Library, and Medline to identify studies that examined the use of NGT in patients that underwent cardiac surgery. Data and literature about NGT's impact on post-operative nausea and vomiting, early administration of medications, interference with imaging, post-operative complications, respiratory complications, gastrointestinal complications, pain and discomfort, and enhanced recovery after surgery were examined. RESULTS: Three reports investigating the use of NGT to reduce post-operative nausea and vomiting were examined with sample sizes of 114, 104, and 202. The use of NGT did not significantly reduce the incidence of post-operative nausea and vomiting in 2/3 of the studies: a 2% nausea reduction with NGT (p < 0.05), a 7.7% nausea reduction with NGT (p = 0.6), and a 14% vomiting reduction with NGT (p = 0.007). The prevalence of pneumonia following NGT use has been shown to vary ranging from 4 to 95% with associated mortality rates of 17 to 62%. CONCLUSION: Based on our findings, there is currently not sufficient evidence to support the routine use of NGT during cardiac surgery. Further research is needed to establish the role of NGT in this patient population.

Is It Feasible to Implant Sutureless Valves in Presence of Diseased Aortic Root and Aortic Aneurysm?

Sutureless bioprosthetic valves are typically used in patients with a normal-sized aortic root and annulus because of concerns that the stent portion of the valve will not be properly anchored. This report describes an initial case series of sutureless valve implantation in the setting of a diseased aortic root and ascending aortic aneurysm, and it shows that the use of the Perceval valve (LivaNova PLC, London, UK) is feasible in these complex situations.