Electronic clinical laboratory test results data tables: lessons from Mini-Sentinel.

PURPOSE: Developing electronic clinical data into a common data model posed substantial challenges unique from those encountered with administrative data. We present here the design, implementation, and use of the Mini-Sentinel Distributed Database laboratory results table (LRT). METHODS: We developed the LRT and guided Mini-Sentinel data partners (DPs) in populating it from their source data. Data sources included electronic health records and internal and contracted clinical laboratory systems databases. We employed the Logical Observation Identifiers, Names, and Codes (LOINC®) results reporting standards. We evaluated transformed results data using data checks and an iterative, ongoing characterization and harmonization process. RESULTS: Key LRT variables included test name, subcategory, specimen source, LOINC, patient location, specimen date and time, result unit, and unique person identifier. Selected blood and urine chemistry, hematology, coagulation, and influenza tests were included. Twelve DPs with outpatient test results participated; four also contributed inpatient test results. As of September 2013, the LRT included 385,516,239 laboratory test results; data are refreshed at least quarterly. LOINC availability and use varied across DP. Multiple data quality and content issues were identified and addressed. CONCLUSION: Developing the LRT brought together disparate data sources with no common coding structure. Clinical laboratory test results obtained during routine healthcare delivery are neither uniformly coded nor documented in a standardized manner. Applying a systematic approach with data harmonization efforts and ongoing oversight and management is necessary for a clinical laboratory results data table to remain valid and useful.

Validity of diagnostic codes to identify cases of severe acute liver injury in the US Food and Drug Administration's Mini-Sentinel Distributed Database.

PURPOSE: The validity of International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification (ICD-9-CM) codes to identify diagnoses of severe acute liver injury (SALI) is not well known. We examined the positive predictive values (PPVs) of hospital ICD-9-CM diagnoses in identifying SALI among health plan members in the Mini-Sentinel Distributed Database (MSDD) for patients without liver/biliary disease and for those with chronic liver disease (CLD). METHODS: We selected random samples of members (149 without liver/biliary disease; 75 with CLD) with a principal hospital diagnosis suggestive of SALI (ICD-9-CM 570, 572.2, 572.4, 572.8, 573.3, 573.8, or V42.7) in the MSDD (2009-2010). Medical records were reviewed by hepatologists to confirm SALI events. PPVs of codes and code combinations for confirmed SALI were determined by CLD status. RESULTS: Among 105 members with available records and no liver/biliary disease, SALI was confirmed in 26 (PPV, 24.7%; 95%CI, 16.9-34.1%). Combined hospital diagnoses of acute hepatic necrosis (570) and liver disease sequelae (572.8) had high PPV (100%; 95%CI, 59.0-100%) and identified 7/26 (26.9%) events. Among 46 CLD members with available records, SALI was confirmed in 19 (PPV, 41.3%; 95%CI, 27.0-56.8%). Acute hepatic necrosis (570) or hepatorenal syndrome (572.4) plus any other SALI code had a PPV of 83.3% (95%CI, 51.6-97.9%) and identified 10/19 (52.6%) events. CONCLUSIONS: Most individual hospital ICD-9-CM diagnoses had low PPV for confirmed SALI events. Select code combinations had high PPV but did not capture all events.