Clinical documentation requirements for the accurate coding of hospital-acquired urinary tract infections in Australia.

Aims: We evaluated the accuracy of medical coders in distinguishing the aetiology of urinary tract infection according to clinical documentation. Methods: The clinical documentation of patients coded as having had a hospital-acquired urinary tract infection from January to June 2020 at two Melbourne hospitals were assessed for community or hospital acquisition. Results: We found that 48.89% of cases were inaccurately categorised as hospital-acquired, due to insufficient detail in clinical documentation. Risk factors for hospital-acquired urinary tract infection were present in at least 30% of correctly categorised cases. Conclusions: Clinical documentation is not filled out with sufficient detail or in a timely enough manner for clinical coders to distinguish between hospital or community origin. What is known about this topic? Hospital-acquired complications (HAC), such as urinary tract infection (UTI) result in poorer outcomes. They are difficult to track, due to inconsistencies at various levels. Sufficient clinical documentation is required for accurate coding of infection origin. What does this paper add? We evaluated the clinical documentation of patients coded as having a hospital-acquired UTI. A total of 48.89% of the cases were incorrectly coded as hospital-acquired, due to insufficient detail in clinical documentation. What are the implications for practitioners? In the current state of clinical documentation, clinical coding of HACs is inaccurate. The clinical team should be educated on the requirements for clinical documentation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]