Search

Background: Electronic death certification was established in France in 2007. A methodology based on intrinsic characteristics of death certificates was designed to compare the quality of electronic versus paper death certificates. Methods: All death certificates from the 2010 French mortality database were included. Three specific quality indicators were considered: (i) amount of information, measured by the number of causes of death coded on the death certificate; (ii) intrinsic consistency, explored by application of the International Classification of Disease (ICD) General Principle, using an international automatic coding system (Iris); (iii) imprecision, measured by proportion of death certificates where the selected underlying cause of death was imprecise. Multivariate models were considered: a truncated Poisson model for indicator (i) and binomial models for indicators (ii) and (iii). Adjustment variables were age, gender, and cause, place, and region of death. Results: 533,977death certificates were analyzed. After adjustment, electronic death certificates contained 19% [17%-20%] more codes than paper death certificates for people deceased under 65 years, and 12% [11%-13%] more codes for people deceased over 65 years. Regarding deceased under and over 65 respectively, the ICD General Principle could be applied 2% [0%-4%] and 6% [5%-7%] more to electronic than to paper death certificates. The proportion of imprecise death certificates was 51% [46%-56%] lower for electronic than for paper death certificates. Conclusion: The method proposed to evaluate the quality of death certificates is easily reproducible in countries using an automatic coding system. According to our criteria, electronic death certificates are better completed than paper death certificates. The transition to electronic death certificates is positive in many aspects and should be promoted. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: In the age of big data in healthcare, automated comparison of medical diagnoses in large scale databases is a key issue. Our objectives were: 1) to formally define and identify cases of independence between last hospitalization main diagnosis (MD) and death registry underlying cause of death (UCD) for deceased subjects hospitalized in their last year of life; 2) to study their distribution according to socio-demographic and medico-administrative variables; 3) to discuss the interest of this method in the specific context of hospital quality of care assessment.Methods: 1) Elaboration of an algorithm comparing MD and UCD, relying on Iris, a coding system based on international standards. 2) Application to 421,460 beneficiaries of the general health insurance regime (which covers 70% of French population) hospitalized and deceased in 2008-2009.Results: 1) Independence, was defined as MD and UCD belonging to different trains of events leading to death 2) Among the deaths analyzed automatically (91.7%), 8.5% of in-hospital deaths and 19.5% of out-of-hospital deaths were classified as independent. Independence was more frequent in elder patients, as well as when the discharge-death time interval grew (14.3% when death occurred within 30 days after discharge and 27.7% within 6 to 12 months) and for UCDs other than neoplasms.Conclusion: Our algorithm can identify cases where death can be considered independent from the pathology treated in hospital. Excluding these deaths from the ones allocated to the hospitalization process could contribute to improve post-hospital mortality indicators. More generally, this method has the potential of being developed and used for other diagnoses comparisons across time periods or databases. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective To investigate a new approach to calculating cause-related standardized mortality rates that involves assigning weights to each cause of death reported on death certificates. Methods We derived cause-related standardized mortality rates from death certificate data for France in 2010 using: (i) the classic method, which considered only the underlying cause of death; and (ii) three novel multiple-cause-of-death weighting methods, which assigned weights to multiple causes of death mentioned on death certificates: the first two multiple-cause-of-death methods assigned non-zero weights to all causes mentioned and the third assigned non-zero weights to only the underlying cause and other contributing causes that were not part of the main morbid process. As the sum of the weights for each death certificate was 1, each death had an equal influence on mortality estimates and the total number of deaths was unchanged. Mortality rates derived using the different methods were compared. Findings On average, 3.4 causes per death were listed on each certificate. The standardized mortality rate calculated using the third multiple-cause-of-death weighting method was more than 20% higher than that calculated using the classic method for five disease categories: skin diseases, mental disorders, endocrine and nutritional diseases, blood diseases and genitourinary diseases. Moreover, this method highlighted the mortality burden associated with certain diseases in specific age groups. Conclusion A multiple-cause-of-death weighting approach to calculating cause-related standardized mortality rates from death certificate data identified conditions that contributed more to mortality than indicated by the classic method. This new approach holds promise for identifying underrecognized contributors to mortality. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]