Accuracy of obstetric diagnoses and procedures in hospital discharge data

Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2006 Apr;194(4):992-1001. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2005.08.058.

Abstract

Objective: The objective of the study was to estimate the validity of obstetric procedures and diagnoses in California patient discharge data.

Study design: We randomly sampled 1611 deliveries from 52 of 267 California hospitals that performed more than 678 eligible deliveries in 1992 to 1993. We compared hospital-reported procedures and diagnoses against our recoding of the same records.

Results: Cesarean, forceps, and vacuum delivery were accurately reported, with sensitivities and positive predictive values exceeding 90%. Episiotomy was underreported (70% sensitivity). Cesarean indications were reported with at least 60% sensitivity, except uterine inertia, herpes, and long labor. Among comorbidities, sensitivity exceeded 60% for chorioamnionitis, diabetes, premature labor, preeclampsia, and intrauterine death. Sensitivity was poor (less than 60%) for anemia, asthma, thyroid disorders, mental disorders, drug abuse, genitourinary infections, obesity, fibroids, excessive fetal growth, hypertension, premature rupture, polyhydramnios, and postdates.

Conclusion: The validity of hospital-reported obstetric procedures and diagnoses varies, with moderate to high accuracy for some codes but poor accuracy for others.

Publication types

  • Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

MeSH terms

  • Female
  • Hospital Records*
  • Humans
  • Obstetric Surgical Procedures / statistics & numerical data*
  • Patient Discharge*
  • Pregnancy
  • Pregnancy Complications / diagnosis*
  • Reproducibility of Results
  • Sensitivity and Specificity